MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1863515186 · doi:10.21225/d5rs30

Drawing Partners Together: A Report on the Practice of Responding to Partnership Requests for Community and University Arts Collaboration

2014· article· en· W1863515186 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Stephanie Mason

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of University Continuing Education · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicService-Learning and Community Engagement
Canadian institutionsNSCAD University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneral partnershipThe artsCreativitySociologyService (business)Public relationsPosition (finance)InstitutionPresentation (obstetrics)ManagementPolitical scienceBusinessMarketingSocial scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

NSCAD University is a visual arts university in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, that houses the NSCAD-TD Centre for Community Service Learning (the Centre). The Centre’s purpose is to manage and promote community part- nership requests with the institution.While community service learning and community– university partnership approaches necessarily inform the Centre’s operation, these need to be modified to reflect NSCAD’s unique position in art and design education. Each partnership request is assigned to one of three partner- ship categories, based on distinct criteria that account for NSCAD’s mission, the duration of the partnership, the level of NSCAD involve- ment, and the support capacity of the Centre.Using these criteria, partnerships are addressed in a consistent, sustainable manner that main- tains collaboration and affords room to grow more sophisticated partnership arrangements. The Centre allows prospective partners to access NSCAD’s extraordinary creativity and skilled artists, leading to receptive partnerships that benefit a range of communities.

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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.558
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of University Continuing EducationSame topicService-Learning and Community EngagementFrench-language works237,207