Unemployment and work: precarious futures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction In Chapters Three and Four we concentrated on education and training, highlighting how Australian New Zealand, Canadian and UK efforts to respond to the growing concerns about skills shortages in the 1990s saw governments try to improve the ‘human capital’ of the young. In this chapter we turn our attention to young people's relationship with paid work. Getting into paid work has always been a focal point in young people's movement into independent adulthood and citizenship (Roberts, 2003; Jones, 2009). As a field of practice, paid employment has its own rules, regulations and social practices that shape young people's transitions and trajectories (Atkinson, 2010). The ways in which these relationships are established, changed and shaped, especially for the young, have their roots in historical and contemporary processes embedded in the macro, meso and exosystems of social and economic policy and the practices of corporate business and capitalism (Mortimer, 2009, p.149). Being ‘in work’ or ‘out of work’ puts young people into different sets of social relationships, especially around access to social resources and opportunities that can determine their future in the social structure (France et al, 2012; Shildrick et al, 2012). Moving from education into the world of work or into and through unemployment shapes both the present life worlds of individuals and their future trajectories (Atkinson, 2010; Shildrick et al, 2012). Work and paid employment are ‘force fields’ (Bourdieu, 1998, p.40) that can protect the young and help them to become more independent, self-reliant and socially mobile (Atkinson, 2010). They provide a critical site of social practice where habitus and cultural and social capital can play a significant part in helping young people manage their social and economic futures (Atkinson, 2010).
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.002 |
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".