Does universities' posting strategy influence their social media engagement? An analysis of the top-ranked higher education institutions in different countries

To ensure the widespread dissemination of information and to foster interaction and dialogue with users, higher education institutions need to develop an active profile on the social networks. This paper analyses the influence of universities' posting strategy on their followers' engagement (reaction, virality and conversation) by measuring the level of activity and type of presence on their social networks. A content analysis was conducted to analyse 90,000 posts by 70 universities from Europe, the United States and Latin America on their institutional profiles on Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn. The universities' posting activity on their social media is moderate (with an overall mean of 7.04 posts per day), but the interaction rate is very low (0.237), far below the recommended levels of engagement. Notably, increased activity by universities on social networks does not lead to greater engagement but points to an inverse relationship between the two. Our findings also indicate that university-created content (UCC) achieves a higher level of engagement ($\overline{x}$ = 169.41) than university-shared content (USC) ($\overline{x}$ = 126.18). This study explores the effect of universities' posting strategy dimensions on their follower's interaction.     

Performance of the S[... formula ...]2 Statistic for the Multidimensional Graded Response Model

S−χ2 is a popular item fit index that is available in commercial software packages such as flexMIRT. However, no research has systematically examined the performance of S−χ2 for detecting item misfit within the context of the multidimensional graded response model (MGRM). The primary goal of this study was to evaluate the performance of S−χ2 under two practical misfit scenarios: first, all items are misfitting due to model misspecification, and second, a small subset of items violate the underlying assumptions of the MGRM. Simulation studies showed that caution should be exercised when reporting item fit results of polytomous items using S−χ2 within the context of the MGRM, because of its inflated false positive rates (FPRs), especially with a small sample size and a long test. S−χ2 performed well when detecting overall model misfit as well as item misfit for a small subset of items when the ordinality assumption was violated. However, under a number of conditions of model misspecification or items violating the homogeneous discrimination assumption, even though true positive rates (TPRs) of S−χ2 were high when a small sample size was coupled with a long test, the inflated FPRs were generally directly related to increasing TPRs. There was also a suggestion that performance of S−χ2 was affected by the magnitude of misfit within an item. There was no evidence that FPRs for fitting items were exacerbated by the presence of a small percentage of misfitting items among them.     

Field of study and partner choice

There is strong assortative mating by field of study. To examine to which extent this is due to self selection or to a causal effect of access to specific ”marriage markets”, we use data from participants in admission lotteries of four oversubscribed studies in the Netherlands. For each of the four studies, we find that the winning compliers of an admission lottery are significantly more likely than the losing compliers to have a partner from the lottery study, whereas losing compliers are only marginally more likely to have a partner from the lottery study than would occur under random matching. These results indicate that assortative mating by field of study is largely due to marriage market access and that self selection plays a minor role. $JEL$-codes: I26, J12, J13.     

Development of the Beliefs about Primary Education Scale: Distinguishing a developmental and transmissive dimension

In this article the development and validation of the Beliefs about Primary Education Scale (BPES) are described. The BPES is an 18-item scale for assessing primary school teachers’ beliefs toward the nature of good education, subdivided in a transmissive dimension (TD) and a developmental dimension (DD). Both dimensions assess beliefs toward the general orientation and objectives of education, the nature of the educational content, and desirable ways of knowledge acquisition. An explorative study (n=352$n=352$) revealed a two-factor structure. Both dimensions were uncorrelated, which leads to the suggestion that teachers hold layered belief systems. In a following study (n=381), construct validity of the BPES was confirmed. The BPES’ DD and TD were shown to correlate significantly with constructivist and traditional teaching beliefs.