The Development of Sustainable Educational Management Strategies for Enhancing Subjective Well-being of Private University Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this research were 1) To analyze the current conditions, desired conditions  and influencing factors that subjective well-being of private university students. 2) To develop the sustainable educational management strategies for enhancing subjective well-being of private university students. 3) To evaluate the feasibility and the adaptability of the strategies for sustainable development of enhancing subjective well-being of private university students. A multi-stage sampling method was employed to select 384 private university students as the sample group for the questionnaire. Additionally, purposive sampling was used to select 12 experts for the interviews, and for the focus group discussion, and 5 experts for the strategy evaluation. The research instruments included questionnaire, interview and evaluation form. The statistics were frequency and percentage, mean and standard deviation, Modified Priority Needs Index and content analysis. The results were found that: 1) The current situation and expected status of subjective well-being among college students in private universities can be divided into four aspects: individual factors, family factors, school factors, and social factors. All levels needed to development. 2) Strategies for enhancing the subjective well-being of private university students, as followed: (1) Activate the subject's initiative (2) Establish a family support alliance (3) Innovative school system supply (4) Improve the social ecological environment. 3) The adaptability and feasibility evaluation results of the strategies were in respectively highest levels
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".