MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024162455 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v7n4p191

Tertiary Education Trust Fund Interventions and Sustainable Development in Nigerian Universities: Evidence from Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki

2014· article· en· W2024162455 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Larry E. Udu, Joseph Okwesili Nkwede

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCommunity Development and Social Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTertiary Education Trust Fund
KeywordsBureaucracyPsychological interventionSustainable developmentEconomic growthState (computer science)Higher educationBusinessPublic relationsPolitical scienceEconomicsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study examined the impact of TETFund Interventions in Nigerian Universities and its implications for sustainable development with special attention on EBSU. Content Analytical Approach was adopted while Public Goods Theory was used as a theoretical framework.The study reviewed the contributions of scholars in this field.Data were extensively sourced from documentary papers from which the three major objectives of the study were accomplished.The study finds that TETFund Interventions in Nigerian Universities particularly EBSU have impacted positively on the infrastructural and human development of the institutions; the implications of this for sustainable development is also positive.The study recommends amongst others, a reduction and/or total elimination of unhealthy bureaucratic bottlenecks involved in accessing TETFund; utilization of honest and competent contractors in executing TETFund projects and involvement of donor agencies to assist governments in funding tertiary education in Nigeria.This, if tenaciously adhered to, will launch Nigerian Universities to a better footing.

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)0.011
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations17
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicCommunity Development and Social ImpactFrench-language works237,207