MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Exploring a New Model and Approach to the Scholarship of Teaching: The Scholarship Teaching Academy

2010· article· en· W2076225766 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fay Patel

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvaluation of Teaching Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarshipSociologyContext (archaeology)HumanitiesPedagogyPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Scholarship of Teaching (SoT) has been researched and investigated over the decades from multiple perspectives. When accessing and engaging the SoT discourse, one has to understand both what the scholarship of teaching is and how it evolved. It is through a critical examination of the diverse range of models and approaches to SoT that one may begin to understand the complex factors involved in shaping the discourse. The plus side to all this is that even though we have multiple definitions and working descriptions of the scholarship of teaching, it remains an evolving area of study. In this paper, I examine several models and approaches and propose a new model: the scholarship teaching academy. Within the broad context of the discussion on SoT, pertinent issues related to access to the scholarship discourse and empowerment of early to mid-career academics is assessed. The scholarship teaching academy responds to the needs of a growing diverse demographic population and to the changing culture of institutions by granting access to early and mid-career academics and also empowering them through the provision of resources and support structures such as mentoring programs. Depuis des dizaines d’années, l'avancement des connaissances en enseignement (ACE) a fait l’objet de recherches et d’études utilisant des perspectives multiples. Lorsqu’on aborde le discours sur ce sujet ou lorsqu’on y participe, il faut comprendre de quoi il s’agit et comment cette discipline a évolué. Pour comprendre les facteurs complexes qui façonnent le discours, il faut procéder à un examen critique des divers modèles et approches du concept d'avancement des connaissances en enseignement (ACE). L’aspect positif est que malgré les multiples définitions et descriptions de travail existantes, cette discipline continue à être un champ d’étude en évolution. Dans cet article, j’examine plusieurs modèles et approches et propose un nouveau modèle : l’institut de l’ACE. Dans le cadre élargi de la discussion sur cette discipline, j’évalue les sujets pertinents liés à l’accès au discours portant sur ce sujet et au renforcement des capacités des enseignants universitaires qui sont au début ou au milieu de leur carrière. L’institut de l’ACE répond aux besoins d’une population croissante et diversifiée sur le plan démographique et à la culture changeante des institutions en garantissant un accès aux enseignants au début ou au milieu de leur carrière et en renforçant leurs capacités par l’entremise de ressources et de structures de soutien comme les programmes de mentorat.

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)0.125
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.070
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1250.070
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0300.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.024
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 head0.364
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.062 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations7
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and LearningSame topicEvaluation of Teaching PracticesFrench-language works237,207