MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1851688939 · doi:10.20355/c51010

Marketing Adult Education for Megaprojects in the Northwest Territories

2008· article· en· W1851688939 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Andrew P. Hodgkins

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Contemporary Issues in Education · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutonomyCorporate governanceContext (archaeology)SustainabilityQualitative researchEconomic growthPolitical sciencePublic administrationSociologyEconomicsManagementSocial scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This empirical research inquiry examines the influence that the current economic climate - driven by the extraction of non-renewable resources currently underway in the Northwest Territories - is having on adult education policy and program development. A qualitative methodology involving open-ended interviews was chosen for this study to better understand how local realities of labour market influenced educational policy and its implications for policy process and practice. The inquiry gathers perceptions of those given authority and responsibility for developing policy on behalf of northerners, and also those affected by such policies. Interviews were conducted during the summer of 2005 and included policy planners at Aurora College and other stakeholders involved in northern development, adult education and training. Findings suggest that the cooptation of adult education by market forces has occurred despite increased local autonomy through recent Aboriginal self-governance initiatives. Implications for community sustainability and governance are examined within this context.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.322 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Contemporary Issues in EducationSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207