MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7096822790

*** * Forthcoming in MESA book **** The Backgrounds of Canadian Youth and Access to Post-secondary Education: New Evidence from the Youth in Transition Survey

2008· article· en· W7096822790 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSchool Choice and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttendanceSample (material)CohortTest (biology)Reading (process)Inclusion (mineral)Transition (genetics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper exploits the unprecedented rich information available in the Youth in Transition Survey, Sample A (YITS-A) to investigate issues related to access to post-secondary education (PSE). The release of these data make it possible since the cohort was age 19 at the time of the third wave of survey in 2004, and therefore at the point of making decisions with respect to participation in PSE. We find that parental income is positively related to university attendance, although its importance is diminished once parental education is included in the estimation. Similarly, the importance of parental education on university attendance is diminished once high school grades, academic participation, and standardized reading test scores (i.e., PISA results) are included. We argue that these background variables an important inclusion into the model of PSE choice. How these characteristics are developed and the mechanism(s) by which they are transferred from parent to child is likely where future research, and resources, should be targeted.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.139
GPT teacher head0.337
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 designObservational
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSchool Choice and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207