MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132254653 · doi:10.12735/ier.v3i3p01

Examining Faculty Motivations for Engagement in Service-Learning at a Faith-Based Institution: A Comparison of Service-Learning Faculty versus Non-Service-Learning Faculty

2015· article· en· W2132254653 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Roxanne Helm-Stevens, Mary A. Rawlings, Judy Hutchinson, Annie Y. Tsai, Robert A. Duke, Catherine Wilde McPhee

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicService-Learning and Community Engagement
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsService-learningInstitutionService (business)FaithMedical educationPsychologySociologyPedagogyBusinessMedicineMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Faculty in a faith-based university were examined on motivations and deterrents for engagement in service-learning. Service-learning and non-service-learning faculty were compared based on rank, gender, discipline, and denominational affiliation. Findings suggest motivations and deterrents for faculty engaging in service learning in faith-based universities are similar to those faced by faculty in non-faith-based universities. Although no specific faith-based deterrents emerged from the study, unique faith motivating factors were identified.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.408
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.526
GPT teacher head0.537
Teacher spread0.011 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education ResearchSame topicService-Learning and Community EngagementFrench-language works237,207