MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6992927494

Motivation and Autonomy in Transitional Youth in Out-of-Home Care

2021· dissertation· en· W6992927494 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Welfare and Adoption
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutonomyThematic analysisWelfareNarrativePerceptionPopulationFoster careQualitative researchNarrative inquiryPositive Youth Development
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Ontario, children in the child welfare system or in residential care placements away from their biological parents, are considered an at-risk population in education and must be supported in Ontario’s schools. Academic achievement for children in care is an area of concern and is associated with poor employment and life outcomes. Transitioning, or children aging-out or leaving the child welfare system, is an even more vulnerable time for these children. Though there is a significant gap in the literature of children in care in higher education, post-secondary education and specifically university education is associated with positive life outcomes. This study utilized a narrative inquiry approach with interviews to explore autonomy and motivation in the educational experiences of youth from care leading to university. Through the lens of Self-Determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2020), this study adds to the literature surrounding outcomes and supports for youth from care and explores the individual experiences of these youth in the Ontario education system. This research project asked: (a) what educational factors led to the success of transitioned youth in out-of-home care; (b) how successfully transitioned youth experienced motivation in their education leading to university; and (c) how and why perceptions of autonomy affected their motivation in attending and continuing their education. Data analyzed through narrative thematic analysis revealed three themes: Living a “double life”, Creating a path, and Importance of support. The findings and recommendations of this study will enable educational stakeholders to develop supports and strategies to help all youth from care for inclusive and successful education.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.248
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQSpace (Queen's University Library)Same topicChild Welfare and AdoptionFrench-language works237,207