Course Withdrawal Dates, Tuition Refunds, and Student Persistence in University Programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
University policies, such as the last date for withdrawal from courses without academic penalty and tuition refund schedules, vary across universities and over time. Data on those policies at 38 Canadian universities, 1997-2005, are used to estimate their relation to whether students: (i) continued in their first university program, (ii) switched to another program or institution, or (iii) exited post secondary education. The Youth in Transition Survey, Cohort B, provides data on students' characteristics and education outcomes. Controls for students' characteristics and backgrounds, cohort year effects, and university characteristics are included. Students enrolled in schools with more generous tuition refund schedules are less likely to exit post secondary education between second and third year, but the result is not robust to the inclusion of individual university fixed effects. Students facing later withdrawal deadlines are more likely to switch (transfer) to other programs or institutions between their first and second year, in both the university characteristics and university fixed effects specifications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".