SEM from the Canadian Perspective: Developing Relationships that Enhance Belonging, Student Persistence, and Student Success
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter explores the perceptions of Canadian enrolment4 leaders regarding the importance of collaboration, communication, and partnership of administration, faculty, staff, and students, as well as external communities, in the successful implementation of Strategic Enrolment Management (SEM) and enhancing students’ sense of belonging, student persistence, and student success. Twenty-three former and current enrolment administrators from Canadian colleges and universities were interviewed and asked to reflect on their experience with SEM over the last decade. Respondents were also asked about the usefulness of SEM over the next decade regarding their own experience and the recent COVID-19 pandemic. The chapter discusses the specific reflections of respondents on the importance of partnership and collaboration for successful institutional enrolment planning and student success. The researchers have identified the SEM practices that resonate with Canadian enrolment leaders. Recommendations for professional practice are discussed, along with potential areas for further research.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it