MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022964872

Adult Learning: Barriers and Enablers to Advancement in Canadian Power Engineering.

2019· article· en· W3022964872 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Adult Learning · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Learning Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertificationLocus of controlAccreditationPsychologyContext (archaeology)Medical educationSocial psychologyManagementMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Power engineering certification in Canada comprises a hierarchical, graduated system available to both young and adult learners. This paper offers insight into the knowledge gap regarding factors influencing Canadian power engineers' decision to pursue advanced certification in the Provinces of British Columbia and Alberta, with implications for adult learning in the power engineering sector of Canada. Comprehension of factors that influence intentions for power engineering certification may illuminate barriers and enablers to adult learning and provide evidentiary knowledge to support a format that facilitates advancement of certification. The research methodology was quantitative correlational design in which linear and logistic regressions employing a modified Bonferroni equivalent alpha were utilised. An original survey was developed for the study and pilot tested for validity and reliability. The sample comprised 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Class power engineers in British Columbia and Alberta. The dependent variable (DV) was the power engineers' advancement intention. In the context of this paper, advancement intention is an influence leading to the inclination or reluctance to pursue promotion, succession, or advancement in employment. The independent variables (IVs) were time commitment, educational support, locus of control, time elapsed since previous certification, responsibility, and peer appraisal. Revealed in the results were positive, statistically significant relationships between the DV of advancement intention and three of the six IVs. Time commitment, responsibility, and elapsed time exert statistically significant effects on advancement intention (DV). The three remaining IVs that did not exhibit significant relationships with the DV were educational support, locus of control, and peer appraisal. This indicated that the IVs of educational support, locus of control, and peer appraisal did not significantly influence the DV when compared to the significant influences of time commitment, responsibility, and elapsed time on the DV. Comprehension of the influential factors regarding the intention of Canadian power engineers to pursue advanced certification may assist industry and academia with insight into the barriers and enablers to higher certification, and the correlation of decision factors with advancement intention.

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.

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)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.882
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.290 · 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