MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7045771525

Build the Volunteer, Build the Community: An Analysis of Sustainable Waterloo Region's Strategic Volunteer Program

2018· report· en· W7045771525 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2018
Typereport
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkforceInvestment (military)Work (physics)Workforce developmentHuman resourcesPosition (finance)Face (sociological concept)Career Pathways
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A lack of effective workforce development is a major challenge to the Canadian economy. Despite moderate increases in investment in employee learning since 2012, employer investment in workforce training is substantially less per employee today than it was in 1993 (Cotsman and Hall, 2017). This lack of investment in people hurts Canadian innovation and workforce productivity. Left unchecked, this gap leads to stagnating incomes for families and communities that get left behind in our competitive global economy. For individual workers it makes it harder for them to get on or move up their career ladder. Canada’s current labour market is highly competitive. Young workers and recent graduates today face high barriers to entering the professions they were trained for despite being the most educated generation in Canadian history. Companies often ask for previous work experience yet entry-level opportunities in many industries are tough to come by. Those in early career positions are often looking to move up in their organizations but have a hard time finding ways to exercise their skills and responsibilities in ways that will further their growth. Alongside the challenges faced by new entrants to the workforce, many nonprofit organizations lack the resources to hire paid staff to fulfill their mandates. Because of this many nonprofits rely extensively on volunteers. However, managing volunteers is time intensive for the staff that nonprofits do have and designing positions that allow volunteers to bring more than minimal skills to the table is difficult. Moreover, low-skilled volunteer positions are often a missed opportunity for volunteers to develop the skills and experiences that can directly benefit them. A deep integration of a volunteer-driven model with a nonprofit’s strategy is not to be taken lightly. In this report we refer frequently to a ‘strategic volunteer program’ because the necessary elements of the volunteer approach outlined here must be integrated into the entire strategic decision-making process to reap its full rewards. What is outlined here cannot simply rest in the hands of a volunteer coordinator – it has to be owned by the entirety of an organization’s senior leadership.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.879
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0090.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.227 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)→French-language works237,207→