Survey on the Assessment of the Current Actual Expenses Incurred by Students on the Meals and Accommodation within and around the Campuses: The Case of Tanzania Higher Education Students’ Loans Beneficiaries
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This Survey analyses the current actual expenses incurred by students on the meals and accommodation within and around the campuses. The study was geared towards achieving the following objectives: (i) to examine the current cost incurred by a students for meals In Campus, (ii) to examine the current cost incurred by a students for accommodation In Campus, (iii) to examine the current cost incurred by a students for meals Off Campus, (iv) to examine the current cost incurred by a students for accommodation Off Campus, (v) to identify the Institutional indicated Prices for both Meals and Accommodations There have been many complaints from various stakeholders concerning the current meals and accommodation allowance given, which was last revised in year 2010/2011. The allowances given was claimed to be low compared to the real cost of living which is very much affected by inflation. The fact was also supported by the Parliament during 2014/2015 budget session. Based on these complains, and the real market situation it becomes necessary for Higher Education Students’ Loans Board (HESLB) to conduct this survey. The survey was conducted in 13 regions in Tanzania, Dar es salaam, Arusha, Kilimanjaro, Tanga, Mtwara, Morogoro, Iringa, Mbeya, Dodoma, Tabora, Mwanza, Kagera, and Unguja, in which 70 universities and 105 cafeteria were visited. Data were collected from 1120 students’ respondents and 105 managers/owners of the cafeterias/hotels/kiosks. Data were analysed using SPSS computer software. The study concluded that students are willing to pay Tanzanian Shillings (Tshs.) 5,000 at minimum for breakfast, lunch and dinner and also a maximum of Tshs. 7,500. It was further shown that students prefer paying accommodation for both In Campus and Off Campus at the rate between Tshs. 300 and Tshs. 700 even though they actually pay between Tshs. 1,000 and Tshs. 1,700 Off Campus and between Tshs. 300 and Tshs. 1,000 for accommodation In Campus. Also 90% of students’ respondents revealed that Tshs. 7,500 given now as meals and accommodation allowance is not sufficient. It was also concluded that the institutional set prices for meals and accommodation have no any effect on the real price prevailing. Based on the results of the analysis the study recommended that HESLB should advise the Government to consider revising the allowances for meals (breakfast, lunch and dinner) at the students maximum preference which is Tshs. 7,500 plus accommodation cost which should be at Tshs. 2,500 (a maximum amount paid for accommodation Off Campus + associated costs such as water bills, electricity bills and security bills) the sum should be equal to Tshs. 10,000 which was the maximum amount preferred by more than 50% of the students’ respondents, that is Tshs. (7,500 + 1,700 + 800 = 10,000). Universities should administer and manage the cafeterias within the university so that they can control prices, quality as well as taste and preference of the students because these cafeterias can save a lot of students as they spend most of their time In Campus.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it