MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210487655 · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v11n4p18

Utilization Trends of the Israeli Higher Education System by Generation Z from 2015-2020

2022· article· en· W4210487655 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Erez Cohen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Higher Education · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGenerational Differences and Trends
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMilestoneContext (archaeology)Higher educationDrop outPolitical scienceMathematics educationPsychologyDemographic economicsGeographyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study focuses on members of Generation Z, born from the mid-1990s until the end of the first decade of the current century into a world of technology, social networks, and a culture of immediate messaging. The study seeks to examine the effect of this generation’s pragmatic outlook both in general and in the context of acquiring a higher education, on trends involving registration for undergraduate studies. The Israeli system of higher education was chosen as a case study since the rate of Israelis with a higher education is among the highest in the world. Academic studies are perceived in Israel as a crucial milestone and an essential developmental stage in the life course of many young people. Data on the distribution of students among the different disciplines shall be analyzed by correlational examination of changes in these trends in the various degree levels from 2015-2020. The research findings show that from the mid-2010s a drop is evident in the number of undergraduate students. Moreover, a conspicuous increase is evident in the number of students in the fields of medicine and allied health professions, science and mathematics, engineering and architecture, which are considered applied fields, while a decline is evident in the social sciences, the humanities, law, and business administration. These findings point to the tendency of Generation Z to practical and technological studies more than fields considered less practical. The research conclusions call for implementing several regulatory steps in order to adapt the system of higher education to the characteristics and needs of Generation Z, such as expanding the professional training program in less practical disciplines, shortening the duration of studies in technological vocational departments, increasing the use of online teaching, and others.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.319 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Higher EducationSame topicGenerational Differences and TrendsFrench-language works237,207