MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2781001630

Brand Promotion for Educational Leadership Program in Canadian Universities: Its Impact on Students’ Choice in Ontario’s Graduate School

2017· dissertation· en· W2781001630 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Annastasia Onyinyechukwuka Oraegbunem

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2017
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Marketing Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEducational leadershipPromotion (chess)PedagogyGraduate studentsMedical educationPolitical scienceSociologyPublic relationsMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective: This study investigated the brand promotion for educational leadership program in Canadian universities: its impact on students’ choice in Ontario’s graduate school, with the purpose to explore and compare brand promotion strategies that PSEIs apply to entice prospective students to their school of choice. Theoretical framework and related literature were reviewed as a preliminary response to the research questions. Method: A qualitative research, the participants were purposefully sampled, based on the five avowed Ontario universities that offer the mentioned program. Instruments for data collection and analysis were: interviews of five public relations officers, transcribed by Voice base software and questionnaire for twenty students constructed and analysed with survey monkey software. Results: The participants’ responses presented different educational brand promotional strategies and reasons for students’ school of choice. Conclusion: The data suggests that brand promotion strategies lure students to their school of choice and sustain the institution’s legitimacy. Abstract Objective: This study investigated the brand promotion for educational leadership program in Canadian universities: its impact on students’ choice in Ontario’s graduate school, with the purpose to explore and compare brand promotion strategies that PSEIs apply to entice prospective students to their school of choice. Theoretical framework and related literature were reviewed as a preliminary response to the research questions. Method: A qualitative research, the participants were purposefully sampled, based on the five avowed Ontario universities that offer the mentioned program. Instruments for data collection and analysis were: interviews of five public relations officers, transcribed by Voice base software and questionnaire for twenty students constructed and analysed with survey monkey software. Results: The participants’ responses presented different educational brand promotional strategies and reasons for students’ school of choice. Conclusion: The data suggests that brand promotion strategies lure students to their school of choice and sustain the institution’s legitimacy.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace (University of Toronto)Same topicManagement and Marketing EducationFrench-language works237,207