Marketing Inclusion in the Curricula of U. S. Nonprofit Management Programs
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to ascertain the degree to which marketing was integrated into the curricula of U. S. nonprofit management programs. Seventyfour program directors of U. S. nonprofit management programs responded to a national survey. They answered questions pertaining to the academic location of the program, their own academic fields, the number of marketing and marketingrelated courses in their programs, their perceptions of what topics are considered part of marketing, and the relative importance they assigned to marketing in relation to other topics. Major points are the following: (1) Program directors are primarily from the public administration field (26 percent); (2) the nonprofit management programs had, on average, about one course dedicated to nonprofit marketing, and two marketing-related courses such as fund-raising or public relations; (3) program directors ranked marketing as sixth among 13 core subjects, indicating that a moderate importance is assigned to marketing in the curricula; (4) findings indicate that nonprofit management programs might benefit by recruiting nonprofit marketing professors to teach these courses and participate in curriculum development.
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 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 | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it