Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purposes of this study were to review the rural youth programs of selected foreign countries and to draw some implications to the rural youth programs in Korea. The youth development programs reviewed were 4-H Youth Development Program of U.S.A, Rural Youth Information Service of Australia, Rural Youth Job Strategy of Canada, The Urban-Rural Youth Program of U.S.A, and Expert Consultation on Extension Rural Youth Programmes and Sustainable Development of FAO. After reviewing the rural youth programs of selected foreign countries, the authors suggested the following implications for further development of rural youth programs in Korea; 1. The target group of rural youth programs should include urban youth as well as rural youth, and the programs should be focused on enlarging their awareness of the rural community and agriculture. 2. Rural youth programs should be extended beyond agricultural sectors, such as leadership, career development, leisure activity, and cultural life. 3. We should develop some programs to support academic achievement, career development, employment, cultural needs including some strategies to prevent problematic behaviors of rural youth. 4. Rural youth should be supported more opportunities to join the community life to experience and learn various life skills through active participation such as interpersonal skill, leadership skill, and problem-solving skill.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".