The role of community education coordinators in community schools in the lower mainland and Victoria, British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to describe community education and to identify roles of community education coordinators. A literature review formed the basis of a research instrument which was devised and used to discover actual and ideal roles of coordinators in community schools in the Lower Mainland and Victoria, British Columbia. Five pilot studies were executed to establish exclusive role descriptors. The role descriptors established were: instructor, public relations person, community developer, administrator, learner and counselor. A token distribution procedure was employed to determine the amount of time 21 coordinators 'actually' spent and 'would like' to spend at each role during an average week. A questionnaire was developed to gather personal data; the Eysenck Personality Inventory was selected to measure two personality characteristics - extraversion and neuroticism. For reliability purposes the token distribution instrument was administered to a random sample of coordinators two months after the initial survey. The study described the personal characteristics of the coordinators, determined the mean percentage of time they actually spent and would like to spend at each role and determined the relationships among the roles and between the roles and personal characteristics. Community education is spreading rapidly in British Columbia and is in a constant state of change. The research instrument used in this study permits the jobs of the coordinators to be described and may be used as a basis for determining their role expectation, as a guide for dividing their work time, and to compare their activities with the average of other coordinators. The behaviours of the coordinators will inevitably depend, however, on the circumstances surrounding their job, their preparation for the job, and the attitudes of those involved in the programs that they provide.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".