Adventures in Intergenerational Service-Learning: Laughter, Friendship, and Life Advice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using pre- and post-visit reflection papers from a third-year undergraduate leisure and aging course, this paper describes the ways in which an intergenerational service-learning project fostered greater understanding of aging, long-term care (LTC) homes and the people who reside in them. Partnering with a LTC home in the Niagara Region of Ontario, 50 students gathered first-hand life stories from older adults over a period of 5 weeks. In pairs, students considered course content in relation to stories of life transitions they have yet to experience and reflected on generational similarities and differences. The overall project incorporated biography and photography-based assignments in order to create individual narratives for each participant in the project. Supplementary coursework enabled students to develop skills related to creative representation of the stories (e.g., lessons on photography and biography writing). This intergenerational project culminated with an exhibit of students' work at the end of the term, attended by our storytellers, their families and friends as well as staff at the home. In pre- and post-visit reflection assignments, students described how their experiences disrupted assumptions they held about older adults, LTC homes and the experience of aging.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".