MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1832442546 · doi:10.47678/cjhe.v33i2.183432

Tuition-Waiver Policies for Older Learners in University Courses: Past Practices, Current Developments and Future Prospects

2003· article· en· W1832442546 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Gordon Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Higher Education · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWaiverPolitical scienceHigher educationEconomic growthPublic administrationPublic relationsMedical educationMedicineLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past 30 years, many universities in Canada and the United States have introduced tuition-waiver policies for older adults. This article reviews the literature describing the development and outcomes of these programs. Although several national surveys of tuition-waiver programs have been reported in the United States, none have previously been reported for Canadian universities. This article reports the results of the first such survey. Despite the widespread availability of tuition- waiver programs in Canada and the United States, it is clear that such programs have failed to attract significant numbers of older learners. The paper examines the causes and the implications of this failure.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2003
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Higher EducationSame topicRetirement, Disability, and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207