MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7095495745

May Luong is with the Labour and Household Surveys

2015· article· en· W7095495745 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStudent loanGraduation (instrument)DebtFellLoanStudent debtRevenue
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

nterest in student loan debt heightened in the early 1990s when the average tuition fees jumped by 10% two years in a row. While the rate of tuition increase subsequently fell back to single digits, between 1989/1990 and 2008/2009 tuition fees more than doubled in constant dollars (Chart A).1 The rise in tui-tion fees in most provinces brought increased atten-tion to levels of student borrowing and associated debt loads. One study found that between 1982 and 1995, the proportion of bachelor’s graduates with student loan debt rose from 45 % to 47 % for men and from 39 % to 44 % for women. Average loan amounts at graduation for those with a bachelor’s degree also rose during this period by 121 % for men and 145 % for women (Finnie 2002). The rise in average tuition fees is the result of a sub-stantial shift in the funding of postsecondary educa-tion (PSE), a change requiring students to pay proportionally more while governments pay propor-tionally less (Schwartz and Finnie 2002). Between 1989 and 2009, average tuition fees as a percentage of total revenues for universities and colleges more than dou-bled, rising from 10 % to 21 % while funding from government fell from 72 % to 55%.2 Although the cost of postsecondary education has increased for students, most individuals interested in pursuing studies are able to do so,3 whether through personal savings, parental contributions or govern-ment-sponsored student loans (see Canada Student Loans Program). For those not eligible for government-sponsored programs, loans through private institutions are also available. It is widely accepted that borrowing for postsecond-ary education is a long-term financial investment. Indi-viduals spend time and money on their education to increase the chances of obtaining meaningful, higher-Chart A Average tuition fees for full-time undergraduate university students Source: Statistics Canada, Tuition and living accommodation costs for full-time students at Canadian degree-granting institutions,

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.854
Threshold uncertainty score0.487

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1460.063

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCanadian Policy and Governance→French-language works237,207→