MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066392426 · doi:10.1080/15228950802110429

Associated Canadian Theological Schools: Building an Online Graduate Information Literacy Course Without a Blueprint

2008· article· en· W2066392426 on OpenAlexaffabout
William Badke

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic & Access Services Quarterly · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsTrinity Western UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation literacyBlueprintOnline courseCourse (navigation)Process (computing)Library instructionGraduate studentsMathematics educationLibrary scienceMedical educationComputer scienceSociologyPedagogyPsychologyEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY Associated Canadian Theological Schools is a graduate seminary consortium affiliated with Trinity Western University. Since its beginning in 1988 it has had a required one credit research course as a prerequisite for all programs. Several factors demanded the creation of an online version of the course as an alternative to the ongoing live course, but the literature on graduate level for-credit information literacy courses was sparse, and for online courses of this type was virtually non-existent. A process of trial and error since the online course's inception in 2000 has created a more mature offering that now meets the desired criteria for education that is learner-focused and interactive, with a priority on skill development through assignments using student-selected topics. While several hard lessons have had to be learned, the course is achieving its desired ends.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.782
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0780.012

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublic & Access Services QuarterlySame topicLibrary Science and Information LiteracyFrench-language works237,207