MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979148575 · doi:10.1080/02255189.2000.9669911

Perceptions of Labour Market and Post-School Plans: Some Evidence from India

2000· article· en· W1979148575 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Autar S. Dhesi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d études du développement · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicLabor market dynamics and wage inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionLabour economicsBusinessGeographyDemographic economicsEconomicsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The incentives resulting from institutional structures in education and labour markets and how they are perceived by students and their parents significantly influence post-school plans. The institutional structures as evolved in the context of Indian development strategy, have created incentives for individuals to seek higher education and employment in the public sector. However, excessive emphasis on capital-intensive modern industry has constrained the growth of employment for the educated. With increasing liberalization of the economy, employment opportunities in the public sector will be further limited. Therefore, educated persons will face an increasing unemployment problem unless they break away from the older perceptions of opportunity and security. Using data from a sample survey of 1,018 secondary school students and their parents, this paper attempts to explore the extent to which their perceptions are changing vis à vis the new opportunities emerging in the private sector, especially for self-employed entrepreneurs. The possible constraints hindering the change in perception are also examined In conclusion, policy measures aimed at modifying the structure of incentives to facilitate such changes are suggested.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.131
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d études du développementSame topicLabor market dynamics and wage inequalityFrench-language works237,207