MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392860638 · doi:10.5539/hes.v14n2p27

Evaluating Student Satisfaction: A Small Private University Perspective in Japan

2024· article· en· W4392860638 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Greg R. Stein, Yvonne Wei

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)PsychologyHigher educationMathematics educationMedical educationPedagogyComputer sciencePolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates undergraduate student satisfaction at a small private university in Japan, focusing on factors like social environment, instructors, facilities, support, academic grit, and student engagement. Given Japan's demographic challenges and the heightened competition in higher education, understanding these factors is crucial for student retention and institutional stability. The study employs a quantitative approach, analyzing data from a sample that mirrors the university's demographic composition. Key findings reveal that instructors, facilities, and support significantly influence student satisfaction, with distinct variations observed when analyzed by gender and academic year. In contrast, grit and engagement were not statistically significant predictors; their roles in the broader educational context warrant further exploration. This study reveals actionable strategies to elevate student satisfaction at a small private Japanese university, addressing institutional, administrative, and instructional dimensions. Recommendations include upgrading facilities and enhancing the social atmosphere to foster a conducive learning environment, focusing on faculty development to improve instructional quality, and tailoring engagement strategies to meet gender-specific and year-specific needs. These measures aim to mitigate challenges like declining enrollment and student attrition by creating a more fulfilling university experience and strengthening the institution's reputation and appeal.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.359 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher Education StudiesSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207