What Drives Enrolment Gaps in Further Education? The Role of Beliefs in Sequential Schooling Decisions
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
We study students’ motives to obtain sixth form and university education in a sample of 885 secondary school students in the UK. At each educational stage, perceptions about the consumption value of education explain a substantial share of the variation in students’ intentions to obtain further education, while beliefs about the monetary benefits and costs are not found to play an important role. Beliefs about the consumption value of university predict not only students’ intentions to go to university but also their intentions to go to sixth form, highlighting the importance of dynamic considerations in the choice. We further document that students’ beliefs about the consumption value of further schooling strongly predict students’ perceptions about how likely it is that they will obtain the necessary grades to proceed to the next educational stage. Differences in the perceived consumption value across gender and socioeconomic groups can account for a sizeable proportion of the gender and socioeconomic gaps in students’ intentions to pursue further education as well as in their perceptions about their own performance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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