Understanding child supervision through a different lens: perspectives of South Korean caregivers and adolescents in Toronto, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Child supervision is integral to the wellbeing and healthy development of children and adolescents. Parenting decisions and practices, including on child supervision, are greatly influenced by society’s norms and values, hence the need to explore child supervision norms and practices before and after families migrate to a new country. There has been limited scholarly attention to child supervision practices among migrant families, particularly how immigrant caregivers and children perceive adequate child supervision and the influence of different supervision practices on the wellbeing of children and adolescents. Fifteen South Korean caregivers and ten South Korean adolescents living in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) were interviewed about their perceptions of adequate child supervision, how child supervision norms and practices changed after migration to Canada, and their perspectives of children home alone without adult supervision in South Korea and Canada. The study results are presented in two sections – the first one focuses on caregivers and adolescents’ understandings and practice of supervision in South Korea and in Canada, and the second one explores their views and experiences regarding children home alone in these countries. South Korean immigrant caregivers and adolescents have different perceptions of what constitutes adequate supervision and children being home alone. Families experience challenges providing supervision in Canada due to lack of extended family supports and a different educational system. Various factors, such as the child’s growing age and level of responsibility, and caregivers’ mistrust of their neighbours seem to determine whether children can stay home alone in Canada. Both sections end with recommendations for future research and improved services and community supports
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".