Improving pathways for girls and disadvantaged youth through secondary education and into work: Evidence and reflections from practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Motivation Given the changing nature of work and recent shocks to environmental, health, and economic systems, secondary education in sub‐Saharan Africa must prepare youth to be adaptive and resilient as they transition into challenging labour markets. Access to opportunities to develop relevant skills and knowledge through secondary education is critical to ensure girls and other marginalized young people can secure work or create their own entrepreneurial ventures to improve their livelihoods. Yet many girls and marginalized youth either drop out of school or progress through the education system without developing the skills needed to effectively transition into labour markets. Purpose This article aims to synthesize insights from Mastercard Foundation's portfolio of programming in secondary education and situate these findings in the broader literature on equitable secondary education and preparing youth for the transition to work in sub‐Saharan Africa. Methods and approach This article draws on Mastercard Foundation's portfolio of work in secondary education in sub‐Saharan Africa, including its flagship report Secondary education in Africa: Preparing youth for the future of work, the donor collaborative Partnership to Strengthen Innovation and Practice in Secondary Education (PSIPSE), and the Scholars Program in addition to a wider literature and evidence base. It synthesizes key findings from research and programmes focusing on equitable access to and relevant skills development in secondary education. Findings Three key insights are explored: the importance of targeted financing to expand access, flexible approaches to improve completion, and entrepreneurship programming to develop relevant skills—each critical for promoting secondary education that prepares young women and men for work. Policy implications A systems‐based approach is critical to improving the access and relevance of secondary education. Gender‐equitable approaches that account for intersecting barriers are necessary to improve inclusion of disadvantaged youth in education systems and prepare them for work.
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 | 0.056 | 0.076 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".