MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Transfer Credits in Higher Education: The Path to Globalization

2011· book-chapter· en· W91204707 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christine Arnold, Michael Kompf

Bibliographic record

VenueSensePublishers eBooks · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Governance and Development
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationPolicy transferHigher educationPolitical sciencePoliticsPreferenceGlobalizationPublic relationsBusinessPublic administrationEconomic growthEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Higher education has created global citizens who wish to move seamlessly through learning in ways that transcend cultural and political boundaries. In North America, many issues in policy development and institutional administration prevent students from full participation. Transfer procedures as stated in course calendars vary widely. As the higher education market is increasingly driven by student preference it is only a matter of time and economic expedience before Canada and many other countries develop universal credit models between colleges and universities. Canada’s current ad hoc transfer system needs more to provide an equitable system of transfer for students. This loosely coupled system no longer serves those for who it is intended (Weick, 1988). A paradigm shift is occurring in the processes by which institutions handle transfers. Will higher education be coerced by outside legislation and impending business practices or will those within the system inform the shift through collaborative venture? These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.235 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensePublishers eBooksSame topicHigher Education Governance and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207