A STUDY OF FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO THE NON-ELECTION OF HOME ECONOMICS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The problem of this study was to determine why students in selected secondary schools of the province of Saskatchewan, Canada, had not included home economics in their program of studies. A review of literature identified a number of possible reasons affecting student decisions not to elect home economics. These reasons were categorized into seven factors and three questions. The sixty-six students in the sample who provided the data for this study were drawn from students not electing home economics in the nine schools offering this class in Hudson Bay, Sturgis and Tisdale School Units in the province of Saskatchewan. The students were asked to complete a questionnaire designed by the writer for the study. Approximately ninety-three percent of the questionnaires were returned. The data were subjected to statistical analyses which involved calculating the mean value, One-Way Analysis of Variance and Newman-Keults Procedure. A questionnaire completed by the teachers provided the information regarding the equipment, program and staff which is referred to in the discussion parts of the thesis. As an influence on students' decisions not to elect home economics, the factors analyzed in this study ranked as follows: 1. Factor 7: Subject Requirements for Post-Secondary Courses 2. Factor 2: The Home Economics Program 3. Factor 3: The Home Economics Teacher 4. Factor 6: Preference for Other Classes 5. Factor 4: Tangible Products of the Class 6. Factor 1: The Equipment in the Home Economics Room 7. Factor 5: Timetabling of Home Economics Older students in this study indicated they did not elect home economics in their program because they did not need the class for what they planned to do after high school. Students planning to attend university or vocational school were more greatly influenced by subject requirements for post- secondary courses than were students who planned to marry, get a job, had other plans or were undecided about their future. In this study the decision to include or not to include home economics in the student's program of studies was made by the student without consulting others. If advice was sought the student was neither encouraged nor discouraged from electing the class.
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 | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".