MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362688961 · doi:10.3138/cjpe.015.002

Towards Sustainability of Human Services: Assessing Community Self-Determination and Self-Reliance

2000· article· en· W4362688961 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dale C. P. Howard, Peggy Ann Howard

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Program Evaluation · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEvaluation and Performance Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityNegotiationDependency (UML)Process (computing)AccountabilityProcess managementRelevance (law)Knowledge managementHuman resourcesEnvironmental resource managementBusinessPsychologyComputer sciencePolitical scienceEcologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Self-determination and self-reliance (SDR) are concepts that lie at the very core of human development and thus are pertinent to group and community development. SDR implies the ability and skill to negotiate with external environments to influence the terms of interdependence. Our challenge as evaluators has been to identify core elements that are reflective of the transition from dependency to self-reliance. A further challenge has been to develop a process of investigation that has relevance across various communities. To meet this challenge, we have identified an approach to monitoring and assessing the processes and outcomes associated with the movement of communities from dependency to self-determination and self-reliance. Also, we present a Self-Determination/Reliance (SDR) model constructed on the essential SDR dimensions of accountability, decision making, information, knowledge and skills, and resource mobilization. Critical movement along each of these dimensions indicates progress toward sustainability of community-based human services projects, programs, and initiatives.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.214
GPT teacher head0.528
Teacher spread0.314 · 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.

Study designOther design
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

Citations8
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Program EvaluationSame topicEvaluation and Performance AssessmentFrench-language works237,207