Decision-Making Rationales among Quebec VET Student Aged 25 and Older
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Each year, a large number of students aged 25 years and over take part in vocational and education training (VET) programs in the Province of Quebec, Canada. The life experiences of many of these adults are marked by complex psychosocial and professional events, which may have influenced their career decision-making processes. This paper aimed to identify key rationales guiding the decisions of adults aged 25 years and older to return to education based on a thematic analysis of 30 semi-structured interviews with students enrolled in a VET program. The analysis focused on two theoretical axes: one biographical and the other interactionist. The first involved personal life courses and professional projects undertaken by the student in the past. The second examined tensions and conflicts between context forces and adjustment strategies adopted by the student. The results revealed five decision-making rationales that characterized the vast majority of the students’ experiences: 1) get out of a socioprofessional and economic slump; 2) know yourself better, personally and socially; 3) value the concrete and the practical; 4) take advantage of supporting conditions; and 5) reconcile proximity and the known. The relevance and implications of these findings for professionals and decision makers in vocational training are discussed.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".