Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a growing recognition that postsecondary credentials are essential to securing stable employment in Canada's emerging "knowledge economy."As a consequence, participation rates in universities, colleges, and apprenticeships have been rising for over a decade.These programs are not, however, equally valued.There is much greater public interest in the university as a means of acquiring essential knowledge and skill.Surveys of adolescents and their parents clearly indicate that most aspire to a university education.1 These views are reinforced by empirical assessments of the relative value of postsecondary degrees, diplomas, and certiWcates.Allen, 2 Finnie, 3 and others have contrasted labour market outcomes for university and college graduates with results that consistently favour the university credential.These broad comparisons fail to recognize the economic importance of the skills taught in colleges and through apprenticeships.They also ignore the variety of school-work pathways that exist within the vocational stream and the training opportunities these represent for large numbers of young people, particularly women.Women represent a potentially important source of skilled labour, and many have displayed an interest in vocational work.For at least two decades, more women than men have enrolled in college training programs.4 In addition to the vocational pathways available through the college system, women have the option of registering in an apprenticeship.5 This form of training requires the individual to alternate between the classroom and the workplace in order to obtain the necessary theoretical and practical knowledge of a particular trade or technology.As a complement to knowledge acquired in the classroom, exposure to the situated problems, processes, and rituals of the worksite develops in the apprentice a sense of personal competence as well as an understanding of working culture.Apprenticeships are considered by many as the preferred means of acquiring relevant work skills.5
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.003 |
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".