MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975230259 · doi:10.1080/1360144042000277900

A Learning‐centred Faculty Certificate Programme on University Teaching

2003· article· en· W1975230259 on OpenAlexaff
Harry Hubball, Gary Poole

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal for Academic Development · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicStudent Assessment and Feedback
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPedagogyCertificateHigher educationSociologyFaculty developmentMathematics educationProfessional developmentPsychologyPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Learning‐centred education (LCE) has the potential to meet the diverse needs and circumstances of a multidisciplinary faculty cohort enrolled in a certificate programme on teaching and learning by engaging participants in a learning community, and by drawing upon a wide range of appropriate teaching strategies to facilitate learning and development of student abilities. Action research design was employed to examine the theory‐practice relationship of LCE within the UBC Faculty Certificate Programme on Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. Research data, both quantitative and qualitative, collected over a 12‐month period, suggest that a multidisciplinary faculty cohort exhibits diverse learning styles, and that individual faculty members are at different stages in developing a scholarly approach to teaching and learning. Furthermore, data suggest that LCE can be used to organise a faculty certificate programme around teaching and learning issues relevant to university faculty and that some structuring of the LCE environment can assist in the attainment of course learning outcomes while engaging faculty as active participants in their personal developmental process.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.006

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 head0.194
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations31
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal for Academic DevelopmentSame topicStudent Assessment and FeedbackFrench-language works237,207