MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081547500 · doi:10.1108/00907320210451303

Investigating the environment: teaching and learning with undergraduates in the sciences

2002· article· en· W2081547500 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueReference Services Review · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluencyClass (philosophy)Course (navigation)Quarter (Canadian coin)Process (computing)Mathematics educationCourse evaluationHigher educationComputer scienceMedical educationPsychologyEngineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two librarian/instructors developed and taught a three‐credit, quarter long course for undergraduates at the University of Washington, Seattle, USA. The course emphasized research skills in natural and environmental sciences. Presents a history of the course – how it came to be and the partnerships involved; and describe the process of research, design, implementation and revision involved with teaching. Using fluency in technology and surveys of current students, the researchers concluded that greater learning is achieved through a combination of computer technology and information resources. Collaborations between librarians and departments determined the specifics of the class, which were then incorporated into the course design and implementation. Presents an evaluation of the current course and an approach for best practices.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.238 · 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