MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132983788

A critical feminist analysis of the marginalization of immigrant women engineers: subtle semantics, redundant assessments and conflicting jurisdictions

2003· dissertation· W7132983788 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bonnie Slade

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2003
Typedissertation
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCareer Development and Diversity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationRace (biology)RacismContradictionIntersectionalityImmigration policy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As more racialized professionals have immigrated to Canada, the contradiction between recruiting immigrant professionals for specific labour market needs and recognizing them as such has become more evident. For racialized immigrant women with expertise in male dominated professions the barriers are profound. Using available data, this study has estimated that 12,077 women engineers have immigrated to Canada since 1978 yet there has been no research on issues of immigrant women's access to engineering or the economic integration of immigrant women engineers. This thesis examines the critical role that both regulatory bodies and racism in immigration policy play in the marginalization of immigrant women engineers. Within the literature, issues of gender and race have been conceptualized independently. There has been little focus on the ways in which gender and race interact as relational processes in shaping access to professional engineering. This theoretical thesis concludes with implications for policy and future research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0190.045
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.350 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicCareer Development and DiversityFrench-language works237,207