Institutional Resource Allocation, Student Engagement, and Student Satisfaction at Ontario Universities
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This study examined the relationship between institutional expenditures in student services, levels of student engagement, and measures of student satisfaction across 18 (out of 19) universities in the Province of Ontario, Canada. Information regarding these variables for each institution was assembled from four extant datasets: (a) the 2006 Common University Dataset of Ontario; (b) the 2006 COFO-UO Financial Report of Ontario Universities; (c) the 2006 National Survey of Student Engagement; and (d) the 2007 Toronto Globe and Mail University Report Card. Indices of student engagement included the benchmarks of academic challenge, active and collaborative learning, student interactions with faculty, enriching educational experiences, and supportive educational environments. The core research question pursued was whether higher per capita expenditures in student services predicted higher levels of student engagement and greater degrees of student satisfaction with various aspects of the university experience among graduates. Descriptive statistics were used to generate and compare demographic profiles of each university within a framework of institutional types. Among the universities sampled, eight were categorized as primarily undergraduate, five comprehensive, and five medical/doctoral institutions. Correlational techniques and hierarchical multiple regression analyses were applied to the data for purposes of assessing relationships between the sets of variables embedded in the research question. Correlational analyses yielded significant inverse relationships between per capita expenditures in student services and only select benchmarks of student engagement, relative to active and collaborative learning and student interactions with faculty. Strong positive correlations also were observed between multiple measures of student satisfaction and student engagement benchmarks of enriching educational experiences and supportive campus environments. Regression analyses did not sustain per capita expenditures in student services as a significant predictor of the student engagement or student satisfaction outcomes. However this study did find that select student engagement benchmarks, especially those items related to student-faculty interaction and supportive campus environments, predicted significantly measures of student satisfaction. Consideration was given to implications of these data for post-secondary policies and practices in Ontario, as well as suggestions for future research on the topic.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».