Boomers and Generation Z on campus: Expectations, goals, and experiences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Compared to the other Anglo-American democracies, when they start job searches, Canadian post-secondary graduates likely confront more competition from similarly educated youth, and experience a relatively high unemployment rate. In addition, should they find work, there is no guarantee for graduates that it will be in their area of specialization. There is an added possibility that employment will be precarious. By comparison, in the mid-sixties, labour market conditions were more accommodating to university graduates. Are these different labour market conditions consistent with students' expectations, goals, and campus experiences prior to graduation? An answer to this question was found through a comparison of those entering Glendon College, York University, in 1963, and in 2013. The examination was based on surveys students completed in 1963, 1967, 2013, and 2017. Data from these sources was. supplemented by information obtained through interviews with students, archival materials, and by analyzing the contents of the student newspaper. Overall, the expectations of Glendon students in the 1960s, and 50 years later, were in keeping with respective favourable and unfavorable labour market conditions. For students' experiences this was not the case. Despite considerable changes in the labour market, the way in which students experienced their time on campus was comparable in the two eras.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".