Identity coherence and differentiated life trajectories among social work students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research aims to describe the identity coherence and differentiated life trajectories of social work students according to their age of enrollment. This article reports analyses of a cross-sectional study with repeated measures surveying students enrolled in the first two years of the Bachelor of Social Work program between 2001 and 2019 at the University of Sherbrooke (Québec, Canada). Analyses of the responses of the 431 younger students (18 to 24 years old) and 125 older students (25 and over) showed that both groups of students had a similar profile in terms of their personal experiences, training, values and personal interests that led them to enroll in social work. Additionally, these students considered several alternative help-related professional disciplines at the time of their enrollment. Older students (25 years and over) seemed to be more certain of their choice to enroll in this academic program. These choices were based on previous professional experiences that they had integrated in their life experiences. These findings contrasted with younger students (24 years old and under) who seemed to be certain about their choice of program. In fact, their choice of social work seemed to be positioned as the obvious continuity of their pre-university studies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".