MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955411776 · doi:10.5539/ies.v12n7p28

Non-Traditional Students in A Traditional College—A Feminist Perspective

2019· article· en· W2955411776 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Suaad Alshebou

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAdult and Continuing Education Topics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPublic Authority for Applied Education and Training
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Qualitative researchFocus groupQualitative propertyPedagogyPsychologyAdult educationHigher educationMultimethodologySociologyResearch methodologyMathematics educationSocial sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research explores who participates in higher education (HE) in general and in the College of Basic Education (CBE) in particular from adult female learners’ groups. This entails identifying the specific characteristics of these groups and understanding their learning experiences and obstacles they need to overcome. The study begins with an overview of the changing HE system in Kuwait followed by a review of relevant literature. This involves constructing a theoretical framework based upon attributes of adult education and setting out the critical feminist perspective at the heart of this study. The research follows both quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Research data was collected from female adult learners at CBE by using questionnaire and focus groups to elicit rich qualitative data as well as quantitative representative data. The study concludes with a discussion of policy and practice implications and areas for future research on adult learning and HE reforms in general. Outcomes of this research provide valuable lessons for policymakers as well as recommendations which seek to nourish an environment based on genuine equality of opportunity for all and inspiration for future generations of Kuwaiti women.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.586
Threshold uncertainty score0.941

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.358 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicAdult and Continuing Education TopicsFrench-language works237,207