MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Building Connections in the First-year Undergraduate Experience

2013· article· en· W2003508230 on OpenAlexaffvenue
June Countryman, Andrew M. Zinck

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvaluation of Teaching Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesSociologyPedagogyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Concerned about the success rate of new students in our program we designed and implemented a compulsory set of experiences which aim to support students in their transition from high school to university by 1) developing their sense of belonging to a community of learners and by 2) articulating with them the interrelationships among their first year core courses. We initiated various strategies which we have refined in response to student feedback over the past three years. In this paper we describe the pedagogical moves that constitute our initiative and the lessons we learned. We explore essential academic and personal issues that first-year students in all programs face. We share our research findings and address the big ideas that could be applied to any discipline or multi-disciplinary program. Préoccupés par les taux de rétention des étudiants de première année, les auteurs ont conçu et mis en oeuvre un ensemble d’expériences obligatoires dont le but est d’aider les étudiants à effectuer la transition entre l’école secondaire et l’université. Ils ont établi deux objectifs : (a) développer chez les étudiants le sens d’appartenance à une communauté d’apprenants et (b) démontrer les corrélations qui existent entre les cours de base de première année que les étudiants suivent. Diverses stratégies ont été entreprises et plus tard améliorées, à partir des rétroactions fournies par les étudiants au cours de l’étude de deux ans. Cet article présente une explication des actions pédagogiques de cette initiative et explore les questions essentielles académiques et personnelles auxquelles sont confrontés les étudiants de première année dans tous les programmes. Les résultats de cette étude sont résumés et les idées générales qui peuvent s’appliquer à n’importe quelle discipline ou à des programmes multidisciplinaires sont présentées en détail.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.503
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0160.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.295 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and LearningSame topicEvaluation of Teaching PracticesFrench-language works237,207