Marketing Implications Associated with Non-Returning Students in University Certificate Programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the attitudes and future plans of students who discontinued their studies in university certificate programs. These non-returning students were separated into three groups: opt-outs, stop-outs, and drop-outs. Two separate surveys were undertaken; one survey consisted of students enrolled in a certificate program offered by the University of Saskatchewan, and the other consisted of students enrolled in several certificate programs offered by the University of Manitoba. The study examined three primary questions:What proportion of non-returning students commenced their certificate studies with the intention of completing the program and earning the certificate?What proportion of non-returning students intend to return to complete their program?What attitudes do these students have toward the certificate program in which they had enrolled?Several findings of special significance are reported. First, approximately one-quarter of the students in this study indicated that they entered their certificate program with no intention of completing the program. Second, a significant proportion of the students in this study indicated an intention to return and complete their certificate program. Finally, respondents indicated a very high level of satisfaction with their university experience despite the discontinuation of their studies. The implications of these findings for the marketing of certificate programs are examined and suggestions for further research are offered.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".