MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2013753206 · doi:10.1257/pol.6.4.174

Does Federal Student Aid Raise Tuition? New Evidence on For-Profit Colleges

2012· article· en· W2013753206 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stephanie Riegg Cellini, Claudia Goldin

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Economic Journal Economic Policy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgencia Estatal de Investigación
KeywordsSubsidyCredenceLiberian dollarCertificateFinanceHigher educationBusinessQuarter (Canadian coin)EconomicsPolitical scienceActuarial scienceDemographic economicsEconomic growthLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We provide the first comprehensive estimates of the size of the for-profit higher education sector and evaluate whether for-profits increase tuition in response to federal subsidies. By using state administrative data we include institutions that do not participate in federal student aid programs and are missed in official counts. Including these institutions doubles the number of for-profits and increases students by one-third compared with official counts. Aid-eligible institutions charge tuition for sub-baccalaureate (mainly certificate) programs that is about 78 percent higher than that charged by comparable programs in nonparticipating institutions, lending some credence to the “Bennett hypothesis” of federal aid capture. (JEL H52, I22, I23, I28)

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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 score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.402 · 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

Citations47
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Economic Journal Economic Policy→Same topicHigher Education Research Studies→French-language works237,207→