MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1639928517 · doi:10.1002/bmb.20696

The TRIPSE: A process‐oriented exam for large undergraduate classes

2013· article· en· W1639928517 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemistry and Molecular Biology Education · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationProcess (computing)Scale (ratio)Frame (networking)PsychologyMedical educationComputer scienceMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The TRIPSE (tri-partite problem solving exercise), a process-oriented exam that mimics the scientific process, was used previously in small classes (15-25). Provided limited data, students frame explanations and design experimental tests that they later revise with additional information. Our 6-year experience using it with larger numbers (155-204) in a freshman biology course, suggests that it could provide a means of assessing individual student performance. Students rated the learning value of this experience to be significantly higher than a standard MCQ on a 10-point scale (TRIPSEs 8.2, CI 8.1/8.4 vs. MCQs 4.9, CI 4.8/5.1, n = 712). Additionally, we tested one cohort (n = 146) with a group TRIPSE (groups of 6), and found that this variant also provided a valuable learning experience (8.0, CI 7.7/8.3).

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.386
Threshold uncertainty score0.512

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.383 · 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