Building Community Capacity in Winnipeg's Inner City: Exploring The Learning and Resource Needs of Volunteer Boards of Directors in Non-Profit Organizations, Community Summary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report explores community development and adult education with inner city residents who sit on boards of directors of non-profit organizations - in particular licensed childcare facilities, women’s centers and family resource centers. Community organizations are important vehicles for development of neighbourhoods in terms of the degree to which they increase citizen participation, and stabilize and revitalize neighbourhoods through the creation of social capital (Gittell et al., 1999; Temkin & Rhoe, 1998). Drawing on a “community research as empowerment” framework (Ristock & Pennel, 1996), the project combined research and community capacity building by exploring the learning processes and identifying the resource needs of a sample of Winnipeg inner-city volunteers using an adult education model of experiential learning (Kolb, 1984; 1991). Data was collected through individual questionnaires, focus group/workshops and participant observation.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".