MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025986486

Ontario Post-Secondary Education Funding Policies: Perverse Incentives and Unintended Consequences

2019· preprint· en· W3025986486 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Charles M. Beach, Frank Milne

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnintended consequencesIncentivePublic fundingQuality (philosophy)CurriculumBusinessPolitical sciencePublic economicsFinancePublic administrationEconomicsEconomic growth
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper offers some observations on the funding of post-secondary schools in Ontario and Canada more broadly. Specifically, it notes how limited public funding for domestic students has provided strong incentives for PSE schools to attract full fee-paying international students, whose numbers have risen dramatically in recent years in Canada. The result has been a rising financial exposure of such schools to sudden external funding shocks and an increasing risk to the overall quality and available curriculum of programs delivered to all students. The paper also comments on Ontario plans for differentiation of schools, and raises concerns about Ontario's planned heavy reliance on performance-based funding rules. We explore unintended consequences of crude application of simplistic performance metrics using a number of examples from recent British and Australian experience.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Incentives · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0100.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.308 · 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.

Study designObservational
DomainIncentives
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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207