MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7101035789

independence Ontario Learns Strengthening Our Adult Education System

2005· article· en· W7101035789 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUniversity Challenges and Reforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdult educationIndependence (probability theory)AccountabilityVariety (cybernetics)Government (linguistics)Local governmentFinancial independenceCommunity education
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

continuous learning social participation employment health personal development further education and training Letter from the Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Education | 1 received through the review process, we were told that there is a need for greater recognition and a “home ” for adult education at the provincial level. We were told that links between programs should be stronger so that learners can more clearly see their way into the system and the path forward, whether this be to employment, postsecondary opportunities, or greater independence and participation in the community. We were told that solid funding and accountability are important, and that encourage-ment of innovation at the local level is critical. One of the central tensions that exists in the field of adult education in Ontario is whether these pro-grams should be located within the secondary school system or within the community college system. This debate does not recognize the role of the many com-munity agencies, local training boards, TVOntario’s Independent Learning Centre, employers, unions, libraries, social planning councils, universities, and federal and municipal governments involved in these endeavours. My conclusion and my recommendation is that all of these systems — school, college, and all the variety of creative partnerships — have a role to play in the delivery of programs to adult students. One of the reasons it is important for our provincial government to establish a focus on adult education is to encourage creative solutions to particular local problems and to support the strengths of all deliverers. Community-oriented adult education should involve people at every stage of life and should act as a bridge between groups within communities. This includes seniors and inter-generational groups of learners that benefit from each other’s learning. Adult learners are situated differently than other stu-dents in our society. Except for isolated cases, adult learners have no organized voice to support their interests. “Education ” in the mind of the public

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.005

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUniversity Challenges and ReformsFrench-language works237,207