MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2523177376 · doi:10.1002/emt.30219

Use strategic enrollment planning to prepare your institution for today's reality

2016· article· en· W2523177376 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnrollment Management Report · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman Resource Development and Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstitutionGraduation (instrument)Enrollment managementStrategic planningPlan (archaeology)Higher educationPolitical scienceManagementPublic relationsAcademic institutionPublic administrationEngineeringHistoryEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

VANCOUVER, British Columbia — Knowing that your institution is on an enrollment cycle, whether up or down, can only get you so far in your planning. In fact, given the trends of higher education today, growing your enrollment exponentially might not be the right course for your institution. Thoughtfully implementing a strategic enrollment management plan to grow your institution to a size optimal for the best services for your students and your faculty might be the key to survival, long‐term growth, and high retention and graduation rates on your campus. At the Society for College and University Planning annual conference, Lewis Sanborne, vice president of Ruffalo Noel Levitz, shared strategies for developing a clear strategic enrollment plan for your institution.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.399
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.201
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.208 · 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