Post-Secondary Education Options and the Rate of Persistence to Graduate Studies: Trend in a Minnesota Higher Institution between 2007 and 2019
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Earlier research on Post-Secondary Enrollment Options (PSEO) has produced insights on policies, with emphasis on legislating the enrollment of high-school students who are taking college credits through the program. Previous studies have focused on what are considered impediments to the program, improving governance, and assessment, with a view on academic performance in undergraduate programs, however, with limited attention to higher learning and lifelong learning. Based on the literature, PSEO has served as an early pathway to higher education for academically advanced students, which has also served as a good form of transition to higher education. Despite this, so much is unknown about various aspects of the success of the program. This current study focus specifically on the rate of PSEO participant who enters a graduate and or professional degree program after earning an undergraduate degree, based on admittance in a Mid-western private liberal art university between 2007 to 2019. The result shows that 13% are likely to persist to earn a graduate or professional degree after completing their undergraduate degree.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".