More than nickels and dimes: the health benefits of a community‐based lifelong learning programme for older adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada, as in many countries, public continuing education of the non‐vocational general interest type for people in post‐work languishes on the margins of political discourse. This case study of one such traditional program for seniors run by a school board in Ontario explores the experiences of older adults and the meanings they attach to their learning. The goal is to better understand the roles and effects later life learning has in promoting health and well‐being at both the individual and community levels. This study analyzes qualitative data collected through interviews, classroom observations and documents, referring to the micro, meso and macro levels of theory in adult education, psychology, health and social gerontology. The three main learning outcomes identified include: 1) the effects of enduring interest, 2) classrooms as social support networks, and 3) the awareness of the right to learn. The article examines how these outcomes function as health promoting mechanisms for individuals and communities. The results indicate the vital role played by affordable and accessible public continuing education program for retirees, especially seniors at risk. They also suggest the need for further quantitative research to measure the impact of learning on health and the quality of later life.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".