MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An Analysis of B.S.E.E. Degree Completion Time at Ohio University

2003· article· en· W2004773948 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jeffrey J. Giesey, Brian Manhire

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering Education · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemedial educationQuartileQuarter (Canadian coin)Medical educationDegree (music)PsychologyMandateMathematics educationPunctualityMedicineMathematicsPolitical scienceStatisticsGeographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In response to a state mandate to consider time‐to‐degree, a transcript analysis was performed on BSEE graduates at Ohio University to determine the time it took them to obtain their degree. It was found that the average student took 5.15 years and 15.6 quarters to graduate. Major causes of students taking more than four years were failing, withdrawing from, and repeating courses, enrolling in an insufficient number of hours per quarter, and taking free electives. Also, it was found that hours lost when transferring institutions and changing majors, taking English as a second language (ESL) courses, and stopping out delayed some students. Students in the top quartile of GPA finished significantly sooner than other students while students with non‐ESL remedial courses and students who participated in cooperative education were not delayed. Implications of these findings for Ohio University and other programs are discussed.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineering EducationSame topicHigher Education Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207