MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Communicating Ocean Sciences to Informal Audiences: A Scientist-Educator Partnership to Prepare the Next Generation of Scientists

2010· article· en· W2018357953 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Catherine Halversen, Lynn Uyen Tran

Bibliographic record

VenueThe New Educator · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMuseums and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Ocean SciencesCanada's Oil Sands Innovation AllianceNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGeneral partnershipPracticumScientific literacyScience educationSociologyScience communicationInformal learningEngineering ethicsPedagogyPublic relationsPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Communicating Ocean Sciences to Informal Audiences (COSIA) is a college course that creates and develops partnerships between science educators in informal science education institutions, such as museums, science centers and aquariums, and ocean scientists in colleges and universities. For the course, a scientist and educator team-teach inquiry-based science pedagogy and communication strategies to graduate and undergraduate students in marine science-related majors. In addition, students participate in practicum experiences in informal science education institutions. COSIA aims to engage the next generation of scientists (college students) in learning to communicate their scientific knowledge with the general public. This paper describes how this course and the resulting partnership address some major issues in scientific literacy, as well as how they benefit all the stakeholders (scientists, science educators, college students, and visitors to informal science institutions). Three central challenges to creating partnerships and how they were addressed are outlined, and several underlying principles for initiating and growing partnerships between individuals and institutions are presented. Through the process of engagement in this effort and the development of partnerships between educators' and scientists' communities of practice, it is argued that a new hybrid community of practice may be emerging.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0150.006
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0020.024
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.170
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.163 · 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

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe New EducatorSame topicMuseums and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207