MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2191174903 · doi:10.3233/wor-152198

Faculty-Mentor-in-Rez: The development of a new faculty-in-residence model

2015· article· en· W2191174903 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ria Rombough, Janice K. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueWork · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Practises and Engagement
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResidenceCasualCLARITYFaculty developmentMedical educationSociologyPedagogyPsychologyPolitical scienceMedicineProfessional development

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Faculty-in-residence programs have long been touted as a successful way to provide for both intentional and casual out-of-the-classroom interactions between students and faculty. Despite research on the benefits to students and to faculty of such programs, academic commitments and lack of clarity around the role of live-in faculty has made recruiting of faculty a challenge. This case study provides an account of how McGill University, a publicly-funded, research-intensive university in Montreal, Canada, undertook the development and implementation of a new faculty-in-residence model that honored the long history of faculty living in McGill's residences, provided structured opportunities for faculty-student engagement, and reflected McGill's unique residence culture.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.704
Threshold uncertainty score0.296

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 head0.250
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.174 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorkSame topicHigher Education Practises and EngagementFrench-language works237,207