MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3191401502 · doi:10.5430/jct.v10n3p36

Social Challenges Learners Residing in Informal Settlements in Katima Mulilo Town Face in Learning

2021· article· en· W3191401502 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eugene Maemeko, Muzwa Mukwambo, David Nkengbeza

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Teaching · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Critical Thinking Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPovertyHuman settlementSanitationSocial capitalUrbanizationInformal learningQualitative researchSociologySocial exclusionEconomic growthGeographyPedagogySocial scienceEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this article was to find out social challenges learners residing in informal settlements in Katima Mulilo Town face. Informal settlements crop up as people move from rural settings to urban areas as they seek better facilities, a process known as urbanisation. However, not all who migrate into urban areas end up getting the required facilities. This result in some finding residence in informal settlements where conditions are deplorable and as a result brings some social challenges to learning. This article’s objective is to explore the social challenges learners residing in informal settlements face in learning. The article also seeks possible ways to deal with the social challenges in order to make learning possible. To come up with response to the questions, the study adopted a qualitative research approach. Instruments used to generate data were observation and interviews. To support the data generated from the participants, the learners, the social capital theory and urban theories were used. Some of the social challenges found to impede learning include poverty, flooding, expensive water and electricity bills, limited sewage disposal system, unfair relocations, poor sanitation, unemployment and high crime rate. Solutions were also suggested on how to overcome these challenges.

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)0.003
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Curriculum and TeachingSame topicEducation and Critical Thinking DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207