MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387227308 · doi:10.36108/ijss/7002.50.0110

The Quality of Nigeria’s Private Universities

2007· article· en· W4387227308 on OpenAlex
Olayiwola A. Erinosho

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIBADAN JOURNAL OF THE SOCIAL SCIENCES · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican Education and Politics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersCouncil for the Development of Social Science Research in Africa
KeywordsHigher educationWork (physics)Quality (philosophy)Quality assuranceBusinessPublic relationsPolitical scienceMarketingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the quality of private universities in Nigeria. Three private universities were studied two mission-sponsored and one privately-owned — using six indicators of quality assurance as outlined by Ekhaguere (2001) in a similar work on African universities. Collected data indicate that: the institutions offer academic programmes in the sciences, humanities, and most especially, in the social and management sciences; while there is gender parity among students, there is disparity among staff; the mission-established institutions are better positioned to provide quality education. These mission-established universities however, need to strengthen their staff and improve on access to information and communication technologies. There is also room for improvement in the provision of physical facilities. The study concludes that while it may be worthwhile to encourage private investors in higher education, this should not be done at the expense of public universities because the latter’s academic programmes are more diversified than those which are offered by the private universities.

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.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.362 · 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