“Ready to take on the world”: Experiences and understandings of independence after attending residential immersive life skills programs for youth with physical disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE: Life skills programs aim to equip youth with physical disabilities with the foundational skills required for adulthood. This study explored the perceived impact of residential immersive life skills (RILS) programs on the lives of participants. METHODS: Qualitative interviews were conducted with alumni of three RILS programs. Data were thematically analyzed using a phenomenological approach. RESULTS: Themes identified from fourteen interviews were: (1) enhancing higher-order skills; (2) new notions of independence; and (3) identity change, empowerment, and advocacy. Opportunities to learn and practise a variety of skills in a structured, facilitative environment led to increased competence and motivation to engage in independent activities. Engaging with peers undergoing similar experiences also helped some youth integrate disability into their identity. CONCLUSIONS: Providing youth with physical disabilities opportunities to engage with others sharing similar experiences and challenges is essential. The study contributes toward the development of evidence-based best practices for life skills programs.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".