The perspectives program: creating “connections beyond the years”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Perspectives program is a unique collaborative undertaking where communication design students and people living in long-term care homes co-create ‘zines’ featuring the life stories of individuals living in care. A research project was undertaken to explore the effectiveness of the program as perceived by the people living in care, the staff who work with them, and design students. This was a qualitative study, using mixed qualitative methods. Two care homes in the Vancouver area participated, and 30 people living in care, 32 students, and 6 care home staff were involved. Data collection methods involved observation of Perspectives sessions, interviews with residents and staff, and student surveys. Four core themes resulted from the qualitative thematic analysis: The reciprocity of intergenerational exchange, the value of storytelling in building connections, the impact of connecting relationally, and the need for meaningful and empowering activities. Overall, the Perspectives program demonstrates the value of intergenerational engagement and connection, as well as the benefit of providing empowering activities for people living in care homes. The close relationships formed amongst the participants of different ages throughout the Perspective sessions highlights the importance of creating spaces where collaborative activities may occur, and where both young adult students and people living in care can be involved and connect together in the world around them.
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 | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 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".