The Best Three Years of Your Life: A Prediction for Three-Year Graduation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 3-year graduation rate is a rarely measured metric in higher education compared to its 4- or 6- year graduation rate counterparts. For the first time in college (FTIC) students to graduate in three years, they must come with certain skills, abilities, plans, supports, or motivations. This project considers two distinct but interrelated ways of using advanced and novel statistical models, the Log-linear Cognitive Diagnostic Model (LCDM) and the Logistic Regression model (LR), to look at both students’ ability to graduate in three years and the characteristics that contribute to this ability. The results indicate that the LCDM is a reliable and efficient statistical model that can provide accurate prediction of students’ ability to graduate early. In addition, student enrolled credit hours in the semester, transfer credit hours, student high school GPA, and student socioeconomic status (EFC) were statistically significant predictors contributing to three-year graduation. The significant interaction between students’ EFC status and transfer credit hours has a meaningfully practical impact on enrollment strategies and institutional policies. Future studies could use the same LCDM model to consider the degree to which these or other characteristics contribute to 4-, 5-, and 6-year graduation rates. Identification of these characteristics could have a policy, student support, and admissions implications. Additionally, the success of the LCDM model in predicting ability could be used for abilities unrelated to graduation, including the ability to pay off loans, succeed in an internship, or give back financially to a university.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".