Through Student Eyes: Perceptions and Aspirations of Students from the Armenian State Agrarian University and Selected European Universities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research compared attributes of students enrolled in the Armenian State Agrarian University (ASAU) with university students from 30 European countries (EFMD) about graduate study policy issues. A cross-national comparative design used a survey questionnaire to explore contextual, social and cultural phenomena. Samples included 801 ASAU and 3,265 EFMD students. Demographics of samples were similar. Students were largely unaware of the Bologna reforms and the impact on study abroad. Slightly more than half of EFMD participants were in a bachelor's programme compared to 96% of ASAU students. ASAU students held a more pragmatic rationale for foreign study, ranking ‘advancing professional careers’ as the top reason, while EFMD students chose ‘overall experience’. Obstacles included bureaucracy, funding and accommodations. Although groups had similar geographical preferences for foreign study, Eastern Europe was more preferred by ASAU students. Half of the EFMD students planned graduate enrollment ‘immediately following the degree’ compared to one-quarter of ASAU students. Half of the EFMD students were aware of mobility scholarships compared to three-quarters of ASAU students. One in two EFMD students reported university media rankings important compared to one in seven ASAU students. The Bologna Declaration accelerated horizontal collaboration among European universities. Students have a larger collective voice in curriculum change. The findings of this research provide a better understanding of student aspirations, motivations, expectations and barriers. These findings can contribute to guiding policies and procedures for recruitment, admission, retention and mobility.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".