MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1607346617

Impact of Tuition Fees on University Access: Evidence from a Large-scale Price Deregulation in Professional Programs

2005· article· en· W1607346617 on OpenAlex
Marc Frenette

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalytical Studies Branch Research Paper Series · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiversity and Career in Medicine
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeregulationScale (ratio)Demographic economicsBusinessEconomicsPolitical scienceGeographyMarket economy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous studies investigating the role of rising tuition fees in university enrolment by socio-economic background have focused on the fee changes registered among undergraduate programs over the 1990s. Over this period, no changes in enrolment patterns were observed, possibly because the tuition fee increases were small in absolute terms and gradual. This study examines the impact of a very large and sudden deregulation of tuition fees in Ontario professional programs in the late 1990s. The findings suggest that the enrolment gap between students from higher and lower socio-economic backgrounds rose substantially in Ontario, where the deregulation of professional programs was more prominent. In provinces like Quebec and British Columbia, where tuition fees remained stable, no change in the enrolment gap was registered.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.195
GPT teacher head0.485
Teacher spread0.290 · 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