MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Perceived Benefits of an Undergraduate Degree

2017· article· en· W2595295723 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Cole Norton, Tanya S. Martini

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Research Studies
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyHumanitiesSociologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canadian university students tend to endorse employment-related reasons for attending university ahead of other reasons such as personal satisfaction or intellectual growth. In the present study, first- and fourth-year students from a mid-sized Canadian university reported on the benefits they expected to receive from their degree and rated their relative importance. These open-ended responses suggested that both groups of students placed a greater emphasis on benefits related to career preparation and economic advancement than those associated with learning and self-improvement. However, when asked to evaluate the importance of a comprehensive list of degree-related benefits both groups of students endorsed the value of many of them, including those related to learning and self-improvement. Our results suggest the importance of methodology in gathering data about this issue, and we consider them in light of current concerns with helping students to understand the full value of their degree. Les étudiants des universités canadiennes ont tendance à accepter les raisons qui se rapportent à l’emploi pour justifier les études universitaires avant d’autres raisons telles que la satisfaction personnelle ou la croissance intellectuelle. Dans la présente étude, des étudiants de première année et de quatrième année d’une université canadienne de taille moyenne ont indiqué les avantages qu’ils s’attendaient à obtenir avec leur diplôme et les ont classés par ordre d’importance. Ces réponses ouvertes suggèrent que les deux groupes d’étudiants ont attribué une plus grande importance aux avantages liés à la préparation de leur carrière et à l’avancement économique qu’à ceux liés à l’apprentissage et à l’amélioration personnelle. Toutefois, quand on leur a demandé d’évaluer l’importance d’une liste complète d’avantages liés à l’obtention d’un diplôme, les deux groupes d’étudiants ont reconnu la valeur de plusieurs d’entre eux, y compris ceux qui se rapportent à l’apprentissage et à l’amélioration personnelle. Nos résultats suggèrent que la méthodologie employée pour recueillir les données sur cette question est importante et nous les prenons en considération à la lumière des préoccupations actuelles pour aider les étudiants à comprendre la valeur globale de leur diplôme.

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 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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.689
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0260.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations10
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and LearningSame topicHigher Education Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207