MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001774645 · doi:10.2753/mer1052-8008200112

Summarize, Synthesize, and Space: The Relative Effects of Organization, Repetition, and Spacing on Student Performance

2010· article· en· W2001774645 on OpenAlex
Jane Lee Saber

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

VenueMarketing Education Review · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Marketing Education
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepetition (rhetorical device)Task (project management)Control (management)Space (punctuation)Mathematics educationComputer sciencePsychologyArtificial intelligenceManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effectiveness of using instructor- and student-generated course summaries and a related synthesis task was considered in experiments involving 290 undergraduate students in four principles of marketing classes. Students were exposed to one of four conditions: control, instructor-provided course summaries, student-generated course summaries, and student-generated course summaries plus a synthesis task pertaining to the target materials. Student performance on the comprehensive multiple-choice and long answer final examination was significantly different in the conditions, and the student-generated summaries plus synthesis task condition showed the most significant positive effect on student examination performance. Implications for teaching strategies are discussed.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.230
Threshold uncertainty score0.666

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.216 · 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