Survey of the graduates in adult education (1960-1988) at the University of British Columbia
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Those who enter into graduate study bring with them a diverse array of needs and interests. Graduate programmes are called upon to meet these needs and in endeavoring to do so,institutions providing training must look at the increasing diversity of the field. One way to do this is to determine what graduates of professional training do as practicing adult educators. This study was designed to answer some of the questions regarding the impact of a degree for men and women in adult education on their career paths, job mobility, income levels, and so on. In this study, current patterns in career development of adult educators and trends in the field of adult education were profiled by surveying 1960 through 1988 graduates of the Adult Education Programme at the University of British Columbia. The study examined occupational placement of graduates and the factors determining their mobility. As well, the relationship between training and work activities was explored. Further, graduates described their learning needs which were examined in terms of their work activities. The nature and degree of their participation in continuing professional education were examined. In addition, the reasons for initial enrollment in the programme were investigated. One of the major facets of the study was to discover the differences, if any, between men and women in many areas of career development. The following general research questions were pursued: 1) What reasons do graduates give for their participation in the adult education programme? 2) Do men and women share a similar education and occupation profile? 3) In what way has self-assessed occupational prestige changed over time? 4) Do graduates of the five Adult Education Programmes (Diploma, M.Ed., M.Sc., M.A., and Ed.D.) perform different occupational functions in their present work? 5) What factors influence occupational mobility? and 6) Are there relationships between present occupational activities, self-perceived quality of training in specified occupational activities and self-reported need to continue learning in these activities? Respondents (approximately half of all graduates) were typically female (59.2%), age 39 on graduation. She had worked four and a half years in adult education prior to entry in the programme and was motivated to participate in the programme to increase her chances of professional advancement. She took less than three years to complete her degree and has held three jobs since graduation. She works full-time in a position where administration or management is the primary function and considers her opportunities for occupational mobility as average or high. She earns $46,000 per year (1988). In general, respondents cited reasons related to professional advancement as their motivation for participation in the programme. Women and men tended to be similar in their educational and occupational profile, which was unanticipated in examining previous research. However, a significant discrepancy was found in the annual income earned by women and men working in adult education positions. This discrepancy was not evident between men and women working outside of the field. Generally, self-assessed occupational prestige increased over time, though the biggest jump was seen in the period since graduation. Graduates of the five departmental programmes weighed similarly, though not identically, the amount of time spent in fourteen specified occupational activities. Very few occupational, educational, or demographic factors seemed to influence occupational mobility, except age at graduation. There seemed to be a weak relationship between occupational functions performed by graduates at the time of the survey, their assessment of the programme in preparing them to perform these functions, and the self-reported need to continue their education in these specified functions.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».