Prospects for Adult Learning and Global Change: A Canadian Perspective with Recommendations for Professional Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines how changes related to the processes of globalization are impacting teaching and learning practices and presents a vision for the future of adult education. By examining these changes, with the purpose of understanding their relevance to adult education, the author makes recommendations for how to adapt to new landscapes of work and learning. Three key recommendations to strengthen adult educators’ professional practice are presented based on literature in the field of adult education and professional practice. These three recommendations are to engage in critical reflection, develop communities of practice and commit to lifelong learning. While each of these recommendations are distinct, they are mutually reinforcing to support adult educators' practice and prospects. Adult educators can be influencers in fostering transformation through learning that will shape and strengthen the future. This is more relevant than ever in the ramifications of the COVID-19 pandemic. Discovering what to be aware of and incorporating awareness of the potential for adult education to inspire positive change will promote personal and professional success in practice.
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 | 0.014 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".