MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107651095 · doi:10.5539/hes.v10n4p131

Mining for Untapped Talent and Overcoming Challenges to Diversity in Higher Education: Evidence for Inclusive Academic Programs

2020· article· en· W3107651095 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Joseph M. Green, Koren A. Bedeau

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGraduation (instrument)Diversity (politics)Higher educationUnderrepresented MinorityInclusion (mineral)PopulationPolitical scienceHistorically black colleges and universitiesAcademic achievementEnrollment managementMedical educationPsychologyPublic relationsSociologyPedagogyEconomic growthSocial scienceEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study is to examine and explore factors that impact the successful growth of student diversity at colleges and universities in the United States of America. Special emphasis is placed on America’s five decade struggle since the 1970s to increase college access and success for underserved youth. The paper reviews select federal policies and collaborative efforts by higher education institutions to diversify the population of college students, toward realizing the potential of untapped talent. In addition, the authors review and examine statistics and trends in graduation rates for undergraduate students from First-Generation (FG), Underrepresented Minority (URM) and/or Low-Income (LI) backgrounds, and highlight programs at Predominantly White Institutions (PWI) that have demonstrated improvements in graduating URM undergraduate students. Likewise, the study describes initiatives that have attempted to address the graduation gap in higher education. Readers will have an opportunity to learn about the premier national program promoting diversity and academic achievement. The study closes with a discussion and evidence for continued national interest and attention to building successful academic enrichment, support, and achievement programs for students from diverse backgrounds.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.531
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.447
GPT teacher head0.525
Teacher spread0.077 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher Education StudiesSame topicHigher Education Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207