Triangulated authentic assessment in the HEQCO Learning Outcomes Assessment Consortium
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Higher Education Quality Council ofOntario (HEQCO) has established a consortium ofinstitutions committed to the development of usefullearning outcomes assessment techniques and to theirwide-scale implementation in their institutions. Queen'sUniversity is one of three universities and three collegesof the consortium, and the Faculty of Engineering andApplied Science (FEAS) is participating due to familiaritywith assessing learning outcomes as part of accreditation.The specific learning outcomes that are of interest toQueen's are Critical Thinking, Problem Solving,Communication and Lifelong learning.The goal of this three-year project is to assess theaforementioned general learning outcomes and cognitiveskills using three assessment methods simultaneously:embedded course assessment, using meta--rubrics toscore student artifacts, and using standardizedtests/surveys. The study will document cost and timerequired to access each of these methods in specificcourses, analyze correlation between scores from thethree methods, and evaluate developments of the genericlearning outcomes over the duration of a program. Weaim to ensure that the work of outcomes assessment issustainable, works within standard course contexts, andcan be integrated into regular course activities. Thepaper identifies the goals of the project, currentapproach, and an example of data collection in one firstyearengineering design course.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it