MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060761164 · doi:10.1039/c001045f

A Tiny Adventure: the introduction of problem based learning in an undergraduate chemistry course

2010· article· en· W2060761164 on OpenAlexaff
Dylan P. Williams, Jonathan Woodward, Sarah Symons, David L. Davies

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistry Education Research and Practice · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicProblem and Project Based Learning
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationAdventureProblem-based learningClass (philosophy)Group workPsychologyMedical educationChemistryComputer scienceMedicineArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Year 1 of the chemistry degree at the University of Leicester has been significantly changed by the integration of a problem based learning (PBL) component into the introductory inorganic/physical chemistry module, 'Chemical Principles'. Small groups of 5-6 students were given a series of problems with real world scenarios and were then given the responsibility of planning, researching and constructing solutions to the problem on a group wiki hosted on the Universty’s Virtual Learning Environment (VLE). The introduction of PBL to the course was evaluated both quantitatively and qualitatively. Class test and exam results were analysed and compared with those achieved in previous years (i.e. before the introduction of PBL). It was found that student performance was at least as good as it had been before the introduction of PBL. Retention figures after PBL had risen sharply (not one PBL student dropped out of the course during the first term). Student and staff feedback was also collected for qualitative analysis of the impact of the change. Combining these findings showed that students appeared to show an improvement in, and recognition of the acquisition of, transferable skills and that group work on immediate arrival at university (representing an opportunity to use social skills within an academic exercise) led to high student retention within the PBL cohort.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.393 · 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 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

Citations40
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemistry Education Research and PracticeSame topicProblem and Project Based LearningFrench-language works237,207