The Determinants of Participation in Adult Education and Training in Canada
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the determinants of participation in, and the amount of time spent on, public and private adult education and training in Canada. Using the master file data from the 1998 Adult Education and Training Survey, we estimate probit models of adult education and training (hereafter just “training”) incidence and hurdle models of total time spent in training. Consistent with the literature, we find that relatively advantaged workers, such as those who have completed high school, are working full time, and work at large firms, acquire more training, often with financial help from their employers. Direct government-sponsored training represents a relative minor component of total training, and is not well targeted to the disadvantaged. This is both surprising and problematic, as the primary justification for government-financed training is to overcome credit constraints among the low skilled and the secondary justification is redistribution. We find large differences among provinces in the incidence of training; this variation appears to result from differences in provincial policies related to training.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it