Rethinking Admissions and Enrollment: How Colleges are Adapting to the Shrinking of Higher Ed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Colleges were plenty worried about an enrollment crash even before the pandemic hit. Undergraduate enrollment has since fallen, with community colleges taking the biggest hit. Themuch-discussed “enrollment cliff” still liesahead, with the number of high-school graduates projected to decline sharply after 2025. On top of that, the future pool islikely to include more low-income and first-generation students, who need broader types of support. All of that has led colleges to look for creative ways to boost enrollment and retention. They’re sharpening their identities, casting a wider net for prospective applicants, and improving the student experience. This collection features many of The Chronicle’s best reads on a topic that’s on everyone’s mind. (From Introduction of Rethinking Admission and Enrollment p.3)
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 | 0.029 | 0.101 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.034 | 0.027 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.024 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.005 |
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".