MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118694415 · doi:10.1177/1069072707305767

Charting Grades Over 26 Years to Evaluate a Career Course

2007· article· en· W2118694415 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

VenueJournal of Career Assessment · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicDiverse Educational Innovations Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrading (engineering)PsychologyCourse (navigation)Mathematics educationQuarter (Canadian coin)Medical educationMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grades in a standardized career course offered at a large southeastern university over a 26-year period were analyzed to measure the impact on student learning. The results revealed that 74% of the 6,176 students completing the course met the learning objectives of the course with a grade of B+ or higher. Grades did not differ across quarter and semester systems or following the introduction of a plus—minus grading scheme. However, grades were lower toward the end of the 26-year period following the introduction of a career theory to the course and coinciding with the increasing use of the Internet in occupational research. Grades varied by semester, and they were lower in the most recent period than in any other. Implications for career course design and management based on these longitudinal results are explained.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.372
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.285 · 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