History Repeats Itself: Parental Involvement in Children’s Career Exploration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parent involvement in children’s education remains one of the most significant predictors for children’s academic achievement. This finding generally holds across the range of social group categories including race, culture, class, and family structure. However, relatively little research has been conducted on parental involvement in children’s career exploration, specifically, the relationship between parents’ own career exploration experiences and their approach to career education with their children. Through parents and youth participating in a career development intervention program called Career Trek, the current study explored three questions: (a) How do parents perceive their roles in the children’s career development? (b) How do parents’ educational and career histories influence their perceptions of their roles? and (c) What strategies do parents utilize in terms of fostering their children’s career development needs? The parents in this study appear to perceive the facilitation of children’s career exploration as “restrictive” and therefore do not create/initiate a framework for career-related discussions. Instead, they prefer to respond when their children initiate career-related discussions. The information gained in this study is important for the facilitation of greater parental involvement in children’s career exploration. The results suggest that the best way to shift the intergenerational transmission of limited educational/career outcomes is to increase the career development exploration capacities of parents.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".