MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311157060 · doi:10.1080/03075079.2022.2145463

Who borrows, and how much? Student borrowing across post-secondary pathways in Ontario, Canada

2022· article· en· W4311157060 on OpenAlexaffabout
Roger Pizarro Milian, Trisha Einmann, Danielle Bader, David Walters, Robert S. Brown, Gillian Parekh

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Higher Education · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphYork UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigher educationLinkage (software)EconomicsPoliticsPublic economicsSociologyDemographic economicsPolitical scienceEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of cost-efficient pathways is a topic of increasing political and scholarly interest across many North American jurisdictions. It has been suggested that ‘seamless’ transfer pathways can provide financial savings to both students and taxpayers. However, such claims are typically based on hypothetical cost calculations, as opposed to empirical analysis. Through this study, we model the relationship between student pathways and borrowing behavior in Ontario, Canada – the country’s most populous province – using Statistics Canada’s novel Education and Labour Market Linkage Platform (ELMLP). Our models produce little evidence that touted transfer pathways systematically reduce either (i) students’ propensity to borrow from the Canada Student Loans Program (CSLP), or (ii) the total amount that graduates end up borrowing from the program. We identify the implications of these findings for both policymakers and scholars of social stratification.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.323
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.291 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Higher EducationSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207