Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report discusses the development of a core curriculum for caregiver and social service training programs at Fraser Valley College in British Columbia (Canada). It outlines the goals of the project, which included responsiveness to student and employer needs, quality and consistency of instructional programs, and maximum transferability between colleges and universities. The report then reviews the development of core curriculums at other institutions and in other disciplines, as well as in the health and social services field. It discusses the development of coring models and a list of 115 core competencies for students preparing to be child and youth caretakers, social service workers, community support workers, community care assistants, early childhood educators, and special education teacher assistants. A total of 66 educators at colleges and universities in British Columbia with at least one such program were surveyed concerning the list of core competencies. The survey identified a large number of competencies about which there was broad agreement for inclusion in a core curriculum. The report concludes by discussing the next steps in the development of the core curriculum. Two appendixes list the core competenc..ies steering committee members, survey respondents, and the core competencies. (Contains 42 references.) (MDM) Ic Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.778 | 0.558 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".