Intergenerational Education Programs in Leisure and Aging Courses: Older Adult and Student Experiences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intergenerational education programs that bring young people together with older adults to learn from and with one another have been receiving greater attention in recent years. Yet, limited systematic information is available on the experiences for participants and the potential benefits these programs might provide. The purpose of this study was to examine the experiences of older adults and students in intergenerational education seminars offered as part of a university-level course on leisure in later life. Eight senior class assistants participated in small, student seminars over a 12-week period. At that end of the 12-week term, the older adults participated in semi-structured, in-depth interviews and the students completed an open-ended questionnaire designed to examine their experiences in the seminars. Both the older adults and the students overwhelmingly described their experiences in the intergenerational seminars as positive. Four themes reflected the positive outcomes described by the older adults: personal rewards, opportunity to make worthwhile contribution, exposure to young, and breakdown of stereotypes. The students also identified four factors that contributed to their beneficial experience: innovative learning experience, opportunity for sharing different perspectives, reduction of stereotypes, and effective learning tool. Nonetheless, better preparation for senior volunteers and alternative methods of student evaluation in the seminars may be necessary to enhance the overall experience for both students and older adults.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".