The analysis of effectiveness and review of university extra-curricular programs
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A meta-analysis of Korean studies up to 2017 reported an overall effect size of 0.534 (medium magnitude) for extracurricular participation, with particularly strong effects on community-mindedness, foundational competencies, and college life adaptation.
“A meta-analysis of Korean studies up to 2017 [12] reported an overall effect size of 0.534 (medium magnitude), with particularly strong effects on communitymindedness, foundational competencies, and college life adaptation.”
From Toward Sustainable AI Literacy in Higher Education: A Delphi–AHP Approach to Identifying Key Components of AI/Data Extracurricular Programs (2026) · cites this paper as [12]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Bae, J.-S., Ko, K.-M., & Park, H.-J. (2026) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su18168050 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
- Authors
- Soonchunhyang University, Kim, J., Yoo, Y., Soonchunhyang University, Lee, S.-W., & Soonchunhyang University
- ORCID
- Kim, Joungmin
- Venue
- Korean Association For Learner-Centered Curriculum And Instruction
- Published
- 2017-08-01
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 17
- Pages
- 773-791
- ISSN
- 1598-2106 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2754151952
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Korean Association For Learner-Centered Curriculum And Instruction (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Youth Development and Social Support
- Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Research Studies
- Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education and Employability
- Keywords
- extracurricular activities, university students, program effectiveness, program evaluation, student-centered curriculum
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
