MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Readiness and Use of Big Data Analytics in Selected Canadian Higher Education Institutions

2025· article· en· W4413044325 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Olateju Jumoke Ajanaku, Isola Ajiferuke

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Information and Library Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeverage (statistics)Big dataAnalyticsHigher educationBusinessKnowledge managementQualitative propertyPublic relationsData sciencePolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid evolution of information technologies has driven the exponential growth of big data, creating opportunities to leverage data analytics across sectors. In higher education, Big Data Analytics (BDA) holds promise for improving decision-making, enhancing student outcomes, and driving institutional efficiency. However, its implementation remains limited due to technological, organizational, and environmental challenges. This study examines the readiness and use of BDA within selected Canadian higher education institutions, focusing on Southwest Ontario. Utilizing the Technology-Organization-Environment (TOE) framework, the research adopts a qualitative approach, drawing on semi-structured interviews with 10 academic and administrative staff from selected universities in Southwestern Ontario. The result identifies several barriers to BDA readiness and use, including a fragmented data landscape, integration challenges, and resource constraints. The study emphasizes the need for strategic investments in technological infrastructure, leadership engagement, and updated policies to improve BDA adoption. The study concludes with recommendations addressing barriers within the technological, organizational, and environmental contexts to enhance institutional performance and student outcomes.

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 categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.493
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.020
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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.163 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Information and Library ScienceSame topicBig Data and Business IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207