MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983225389 · doi:10.1108/00400910210416192

The reluctant workforce: undergraduates’ part‐time employment

2002· article· en· W1983225389 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Susan Curtis, John C. Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueEducation + Training · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPart-time employmentWorkforceQuarter (Canadian coin)Working timeMetropolitan areaWorking hoursTerm (time)Full-timeWork timeWork (physics)PsychologyDemographic economicsDuration (music)Medical educationLabour economicsPolitical scienceEconomicsEngineeringMedicineLawGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increasing numbers of full‐time undergraduates are supplementing their income by seeking paid employment during term‐time. This article details the results of a survey of 368 students at Crewe + Alsager Faculty of Manchester Metropolitan University carried out in March 2000. The survey found that 59 per cent of students were working on a part‐time basis during term‐time, with a significant majority working for financial reasons. Although many students found working to be beneficial to their studies, the students are generally reluctant to work, with many stating that they would leave their paid employment if they could afford to do so. The majority of the employed students perceived that working had a detrimental effect on their academic studies and a quarter of them considered that they could not remain at university without their term‐time jobs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations117
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducation + TrainingSame topicEmployment and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207