A Narrative Inquiry into the Lives of Older Adults Labelled with Intellectual Disabilities: The Significance of Place as a Means to Story Retirement
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This narrative inquiry engaged the author in the storied lives of three older gentlemen labelled with intellectual disabilities (the inquirers) as they lived out a story of retirement in their community in a mid-sized city in Western Canada. The author walked alongside the inquirers for nearly a year in search of coherence in their shared experiences. Although the grand narrative suggests that these gentlemen are likely to experience a lonely, isolated, and inactive retirement, it is with confidence and pride that they live a competing story in which they are engaged with their community; they enjoy spending time with new friends, participating in new activities, and venturing into new territory. Seemingly, place proved to be of most significance to the inquirers as they lived out their stories of retirement. However, their storied past drives their current and future retirement prospects as they search to relive moments which provide meaning, structure, and familiarity, specifically seeking out opportunities to serve others in their community at church and the local senior centre, for example. In light of their success, the author suggests that perhaps a lack of structured retirement programming can actually enhance opportunities for growth as older adults labelled with intellectual disabilities are pushed to live a self-determined retirement as they seek out meaningful opportunities for success. Throughout the paper, the author reflects on her own experiences on the professional knowledge landscape as she questions her positioning as a researcher, professor, student, support person, advocate, and friend. During her time walking alongside the inquirers in the three-dimensional space, she became awakened to/was reminded of/experienced tensions in relation to the grand narrative surrounding her own life and that of her inquirers. She relives/retells personal stories in an attempt to find coherence and live in an educative way amongst the tensions.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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 tête enseignante, 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 ».