Assessment of Childcare Workers’ Strength in Providing Care and Support to Vulnerable Children in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: The Case of Kurasini National Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was conducted at Kurasini National Children home. The main objective of the study was to assess childcare workers’ strength in providing child care and support to Vulnerable children in Tanzania. The specific objectives of the study were: to examine competences necessary for childcare workers; to assess the quality of child care services provided to children and to identify challenges experienced by childcare workers. The study was guided by the empowerment and attachment theories. Qualitative research design was used and semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, observation and documentary review were used for collection of data which was thematically analyzed. A purposive sampling technique was used to obtain respondents. A sample of 30 children and 20 officials from childcare workers, social welfare officers and human right staff were selected, making a total sample of 50 participants. Study findings were analyzed and presented using a computer package known as SPSS version 20. The study revealed care workers’ strength is weakened by their educational and training background, inadequate job orientations, inadequate supervisory leadership, organizational and management skills, lack of contractual framework between council welfare officers and childcare workers and inadequate resources. In view of the study findings it was concluded that the government and stakeholders were not adequately allocating resources for childcare workers’ capacity strengthening and facilitation of child care interventions. The study therefore, recommends for the government, training institutions and stakeholders to adequately strengthen the capacity of childcare workers and to timely provide sufficient resources to facilitate the provision of quality child care services to the vulnerable children.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".