MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030522962 · doi:10.1080/08841230802178862

Research Supervision: An Important Site of Teaching

2008· article· en· W2030522962 on OpenAlex

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

VenueJournal of Teaching in Social Work · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReflective Practices in Education
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPracticumStudioSocial workReflection (computer programming)PedagogySociologyPsychologyEngineering ethicsComputer scienceEngineeringVisual artsArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Supervision of students engaged in research projects and theses is an important site of teaching. Schon's (1987) well-known framework–educating for reflective practice–proves aptly suited for this teaching forum, offering insights for research supervision at multiple university levels. Conceptually, a research and writing studio where a practicum takes place is substituted for Schon's illustrative architectural design studio. The framework is mined for its fine-grained analysis of student-coach interaction and its emphasis on bringing self-reflection, a practice consistent with social work ideals, to three levels: research and writing, the student-coach dialogue and the relationship in which it is embedded.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.224
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.375 · 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