Examining the Presence of Youth-Adult Partnership in Secondary Agricultural Educations: A Longitudinal Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The CROPS project began seven years ago with the intent of saving the lives of farmers and changing the behavioral safety intentions of teenage farm youth, through secondary agricultural education. Participating teachers from the ten-state region engaged in a three-day training that prepared them for content delivery through the tenets of the Youth-Adult Partnership (YAP) Theory. The purpose of the longitudinal qualitative study was to explore if the teachers a part of the CROPS project were engaging youth in the principles of YAP and to determine what elements of the theory of Authentic Decision-Making (Natural Mentors, Reciprocal Activity, and Community Connectedness) were present, through the interviews of randomly selected participating students (n = 263), over a six-year period, within 69 focus groups. After a thorough coding process, the students revealed 253 examples of YAP present. Natural Mentoring was determined to be the most prevalent and Authentic Decision-Making was deemed to be deficient. The interviews revealed growth in the presence of YAP over the six-year period, which is due to the modifications made in the training process; however, recommendations are provided to further elevate delinquencies and areas where YAP should be improved.
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 | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".