MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4361002214 · doi:10.18357/ijcyfs141202321285

EXPLORING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ASPIRATIONS AND EDUCATIONAL EXPERIENCES AMONG QUEBEC YOUTH IN RESIDENTIAL CARE WHO ARE AT THE EDGE OF TRANSITION TO ADULTHOOD

2023· article· en· W4361002214 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Élodie Marion, Annika Rozefort, Laurence Tchuindibi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Welfare and Adoption
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResidential careConstruct (python library)Meaning (existential)Qualitative researchObstaclePsychologySociologyDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyGerontologyMedicineSocial sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores the development of aspirations among young people in residential care who are on the cusp of adulthood, and the relationship between their aspirations and their educational experience. We examine the specific aspirations of young people, what shapes those aspirations, and how they interact with their educational experience. This article is based on a qualitative study that aimed to better understand the educational experience of young people in residential care in the Canadian province of Quebec. Biographical interviews were conducted with 35 young people aged 14 to 18. Our analysis demonstrates that, while many seem quite able to project themselves into the future, some appear to see their placement situation and its accompanying uncertainty as an obstacle to doing so. It also suggests that educational and professional aspirations can transform young people’s educational experiences and the meaning that they attribute to formal education, as well as influence their intention to pursue further education. Finally, our results offer a critical look at how youth construct their aspirations, and demonstrate the importance of providing conditions that allow and encourage youth in residential care to develop and pursue varied aspirations.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.224
Threshold uncertainty score0.621

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.141
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.199 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family StudiesSame topicChild Welfare and AdoptionFrench-language works237,207