MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040181427 · doi:10.1080/136014400410114

Feminist theory and collaborative learning in seminar contexts

2000· article· en· W2040181427 on OpenAlexaff
Anna H. Lathrop, Maureen Connolly

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal for Academic Development · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOperationalizationConstruct (python library)InsiderSalientModalitiesFacilitationProcess (computing)SociologyPedagogyHigher educationPsychologyEpistemologyComputer sciencePolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the processes undertaken to construct more equitable and accountable evaluation procedures within seminars: that is, contexts where the salient modalities being evaluated are participation and oral expression. We describe the distinctive features of our model, including facilitation of the work of teaching assistants, ways to operationalize feminist pedagogy, and processes for evaluation. We articulate the specifics of these features as well as offering a comprehensive 'insider's' account of the actual seminar process we employ. We end by describing teaching, learning, evaluation and institutional outcomes.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.798
Threshold uncertainty score0.385

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.357 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal for Academic DevelopmentSame topicTeacher Education and Leadership StudiesFrench-language works237,207