Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new dialogue-based parental and sexuality education program using infant simulators intends to show students in Greenland the level of responsibility involved in a healthy sex life and in caring for a baby. The purpose of the article is to examine the ways in which the infant simulators operate to include and exclude, embrace and marginalize, offer access and create barriers to students’ learning of parental roles and responsibility, pregnancy and sexuality. Methodology: The empirical findings are draw from the account of the education effects observed in a aforementioned “Doll Program” that is implemented in secondary school in Greenland, partly through an extensive survey of students and parents (n = 1068). The sample includes 802 answers to questionnaires from Greenland students, predominantly aged 13 to 16 years, and 266 parental answers. Classroom observations have been supplemented by personal interviews with the principal organiser and the local educators. Additionally, figures on teenage pregnancy, abortion and sexually transmitted diseases were collected from the Greenlandic statistics to get an overview of (presumed) health effects. Findings: The short-term impact of the parental and sexuality education, including the effectiveness of infant simulation is the teenagers’ new perceptions of pregnancy and parenting. In addition the evaluation shows an impact on teenage pregnancies according to geographical diversity and social contexts. The article focuses critically on the professional health education competencies implied in the “Doll Program” to cut across methodological boundaries and address educational issues that intersect with youth health, urban development, Inuit values, social welfare and parenting.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".