Survey of the graduates in adult education (1960-1988) at the University of British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Those who enter into graduate study bring with them a diverse array of needs and interests. Graduate programmes are called upon to meet these needs and in endeavoring to do so,institutions providing training must look at the increasing diversity of the field. One way to do this is to determine what graduates of professional training do as practicing adult educators. This study was designed to answer some of the questions regarding the impact of a degree for men and women in adult education on their career paths, job mobility, income levels, and so on. In this study, current patterns in career development of adult educators and trends in the field of adult education were profiled by surveying 1960 through 1988 graduates of the Adult Education Programme at the University of British Columbia. The study examined occupational placement of graduates and the factors determining their mobility. As well, the relationship between training and work activities was explored. Further, graduates described their learning needs which were examined in terms of their work activities. The nature and degree of their participation in continuing professional education were examined. In addition, the reasons for initial enrollment in the programme were investigated. One of the major facets of the study was to discover the differences, if any, between men and women in many areas of career development. The following general research questions were pursued: 1) What reasons do graduates give for their participation in the adult education programme? 2) Do men and women share a similar education and occupation profile? 3) In what way has self-assessed occupational prestige changed over time? 4) Do graduates of the five Adult Education Programmes (Diploma, M.Ed., M.Sc., M.A., and Ed.D.) perform different occupational functions in their present work? 5) What factors influence occupational mobility? and 6) Are there relationships between present occupational activities, self-perceived quality of training in specified occupational activities and self-reported need to continue learning in these activities? Respondents (approximately half of all graduates) were typically female (59.2%), age 39 on graduation. She had worked four and a half years in adult education prior to entry in the programme and was motivated to participate in the programme to increase her chances of professional advancement. She took less than three years to complete her degree and has held three jobs since graduation. She works full-time in a position where administration or management is the primary function and considers her opportunities for occupational mobility as average or high. She earns $46,000 per year (1988). In general, respondents cited reasons related to professional advancement as their motivation for participation in the programme. Women and men tended to be similar in their educational and occupational profile, which was unanticipated in examining previous research. However, a significant discrepancy was found in the annual income earned by women and men working in adult education positions. This discrepancy was not evident between men and women working outside of the field. Generally, self-assessed occupational prestige increased over time, though the biggest jump was seen in the period since graduation. Graduates of the five departmental programmes weighed similarly, though not identically, the amount of time spent in fourteen specified occupational activities. Very few occupational, educational, or demographic factors seemed to influence occupational mobility, except age at graduation. There seemed to be a weak relationship between occupational functions performed by graduates at the time of the survey, their assessment of the programme in preparing them to perform these functions, and the self-reported need to continue their education in these specified functions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".