MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949881485 · doi:10.5206/cie-eci.v47i2.9330

Out of School Factors Affecting Indigenous Girls’ Educational Attainment: A Theory of Change for the Opening Opportunities Program in Rural Guatemala

2019· article· en· W2949881485 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Emma Richardson, Mary Phillips, Alejandra Colom, Ielaf Khalil, Jennica Nichols

Bibliographic record

VenueComparative and International Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPoverty, Education, and Child Welfare
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaImpactSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousLatin AmericansEducational attainmentPsychological interventionEconomic growthTheory of changeSocial changeSociologyPsychologyPolitical scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Guatemalans have the lowest education rates in Latin America, and within Guatemala, Indigenous, rural and poor girls have much lower education rates than their peers. The ‘Opening Opportunities’ program attempts to invest in the poorest girls from rural Guatemala to build their personal, social, health and economic assets. Realist evaluation attempts to understand the key mechanisms in complex social interventions, and is under-used in education research. Based on data from life history interviews from graduates, this paper presents a Theory of Change to understand the contexts, mechanisms and outcomes of the ‘Opening Opportunities’ Program relating to educational attainment. The four mechanisms most discussed by program graduates are: leadership and participation create confidence; greater networks (models, mentors, peers); opportunities created to participate in novel paid work; and desire for later marriage and childbearing. This is the first Theory of Change that explains out of school factors affecting educational attainment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.222
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComparative and International EducationSame topicPoverty, Education, and Child WelfareFrench-language works237,207