Creative Retirement: Survey of Older Adults' Educational Interests and Motivations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The University of Manitoba's Continuing Education Division (CED) and Creative Retirement Manitoba (CRM) formed a partnership to promote applied research on lifelong learning and older adults, to develop new and to complement existing educational activities, and to explore new program models and instructional methods to meet the educational needs of older adult learners. A survey, the first in a larger research project of this partnership, was undertaken to identify the learning interests and motivations of a select group of active older adults who participate in CRM's activities. The results indicate that these learnersprefer to learn only for interest, in non-educational settings or on their own;are interested, motivated, and physically and financially capable;confront situational and institutional barriers to learning; andconsider learning important to their lifestyle.These findings are consistent with the notion that an active lifestyle, including continued learning, may lead to improved quality of life, and better health and wellness for older adults. University continuing education (UCE) has a role to play in developing and supporting learning opportunities and programs for older adult learners, albeit a measured one.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".