Bridges to Science : effects of a science outreach program on High school students.' understanding of science concepts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many of my students are not prepared for postsecondary education because they feel unprepared in terms of experience and knowledge. This project focused on evaluating the impact the Bridges to Science outreach program had on students' understanding of science concepts. Students' level of understanding, attitude and motivation, and thoughts about science careers were considered as well. This project also investigated the impact on classroom teachers' professionalism, on the program staffs' pedagogy, and on my own professionalism and involvement with the program. The Bridges to Science program offered by the University of Lethbridge targets urban high school students in biology, chemistry, and physics, and attempts to increase their interest in science by providing engaging lab activities implemented by graduate students. Students' understanding of science concepts was assessed by comparing nontreatment lab activities conducted by classroom teachers to treatment lab activities conducted by the outreach volunteers. Pre and postassessment data for nontreatment and treatment units were collected using concept questions, interviews with concept maps, and teacher observations. Other forms of data collection such as surveys, journals and personal observations were used to assess students' level of understanding, attitude and motivation, knowledge about career options, teachers' professionalism, volunteers' pedagogy, and my own professionalism and involvement with the outreach program. The results indicated a greater increase in students' understanding and level of understanding through the implementation of the program compared with classroom activities. Not only did students' motivation and attitude improve, but their knowledge of career options increased as well. Pedagogical improvement occurred with volunteers, but there was little impact on teachers' sense of professionalism. My involvement with Bridges to Science had a positive impact on my relationships, professionalism, and involvement with the program.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".