Volunteer work, informal learning, and the quest for sustainable communities in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drawing on a study on informal learning and volunteer work that was part of the Work and Lifelong Learning (WALL) network, this paper presents findings from four Canadian settings where volunteers have acquired knowledge, skills, and attitudes related to community sustainability. Most of the learning was informal and included three spheres of sustainability (social, ecological, and economic). Making these informal learning outcomes explicit can benefit individual volunteers and increase the sustainability of our communities. Résumé S’appuyant sur une étude traitant de l’apprentissage informel et du bénévolat, tirée du réseau Work and Lifelong Learning (WALL), cet article présente les résultats de la recherche dans quatre emplacements canadiens où les bénévoles ont acquis les connaissances, les compétences et les attitudes liées au développement communautaire. La majeure partie des apprentissages se sont faits de façon informelle, et touchaient au développement durable sur le plan économique, social et écologique. Le fait de rendre ces résultats explicites peut être avantageux pour les bénévoles et améliorer la vitalité de nos communautés.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".