Issues of Concern with Latino Students in a Community College
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the \nissues and concerns that were present with Latino students \nin a community college. The desired outcome was to identify \nthe problems or barriers Latino students faced while in \ncollege and to come up with possible recommendations to the \nacademic counseling staff and other educators in order to \nbetter meet the students' needs. \nThe study focused on the concerns and goals of four \nLatino students (two males and two females), who were \ninterviewed in depth in order to gain a more accurate \nassessment of their concerns. The interviews were held at \nChabot College, Hayward, during the Spring Quarter of 1991. \nThere were 22 questions on a questionnaire they filled out \nprior to the interviews. These were answered by the \nparticipants where they identified some of their main \nconcerns: (a) All four students agreed on one thing, the \nfear they felt that they would have to forego their \neducational goals due to financial reasons. (b) The \nfemales in this study felt a feeling of isolation and \nappeared to be a major concern for them, however, it was \nabsent in the males. (c) The students did not feel that \nChabot offered adequate services to Latino students, \nalthough they admitted being unfamiliar with the \navailability of services in general. \nThe compiled data from the interviews indicated an \ninterest by the participants of this study in hopes that it \nwould help future Latino students at Chabot College in their \neducational endeavors. \nRecommendations included acquiring additional Latino \ninstructors, counselors and administrators; increasing the \ndegree of mentoring; offering a multi-cultural curriculum \nfor students; and forming research networks with peers to \nstudy areas of interest to the Latino population.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".