SHORT FICTIVE REFLECTIONS ON THE PERCEPTION OF A POSTSECONDARY EXPERIENCE OF LONG-TERM INCARCERATED JUVENILES
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a gap in the literature regarding postsecondary opportunities for incarcerated youth. Research and curriculum design are rarely available for the purpose of improving juvenile postsecondary correctional education thereby not improving recidivism rates of formerly incarcerated students. The pilot program in this study attempted to provide a comprehensive university program for long-term incarcerated juveniles to get them on track to obtain a bachelor’s degree. This study addressed the academic experiences, including the School to Prison Pipeline and the academic experience to provide information, justifying the importance of creating postsecondary academic opportunities for incarcerated juveniles. Then, the study analyzed interviews with recently released students of the program to give insight to correctional education experiences vis-à-vis artistic representations, in this case, short fiction. This article presents fictive artistic representations that give a closer look at the secondary and postsecondary educational experiences of two of the cohort participants.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 it