A profile of post-secondary students in Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many benefits are associated with obtaining a post-secondary education. This report used administrative data to profile students (18 to 25 years old) enrolled in publicly-funded post-secondary institutions in Alberta from the 2005/06 to 2010/11. Analyses examined these individuals’ sociodemographic characteristics and public service use patterns based on their enrollment status (full-time or part-time) and credential type. This report found that (1) almost one-third (120,000 to 130,000 a year from 2005/06 to 2010/11) of Albertan individuals 18 to 25 years old were enrolled in publicly-funded post-secondary institution, (2) there was a greater representation of female than male students, (3) about 3% of full and part-time students identified as Aboriginal, (4) part-time students were more likely to use mental health services than full-time students and non-students, (5) students were less likely to be high-cost health service users than individuals not enrolled in post-secondary studies, and (6) students enrolled in post-secondary studies, but not in credential programs, were more likely to use social services and income supports than other students. These findings provide policy-relevant evidence that public authorities may consider as they seek to better support post-secondary students.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".