MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Invisible Student: Benefits and Challenges of Part-time Doctoral Studies

2012· article· en· W221462153 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Peter Bates, Lori Goff

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Journal of Educational Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDoctoral Education Challenges and Solutions
Canadian institutionsBrock UniversityUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMathematics educationEducational researchPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This autoethnographic study explores the experiences of two part-time doctoral students as we document our journey of balancing our multiple competing roles. As we reflected and consulted the literature, we began to identify many benefits and challenges that part-time candidature brings to students, universities and employers. Through our autoethnographic analysis, considered in the context of research, we hope to shed light on the part-time doctoral student experience and raise awareness of the benefits that part-time students can bring to universities and to society.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.129

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0230.019
Scholarly communication0.0160.009
Open science0.0020.021
Research integrity0.0050.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.653
GPT teacher head0.629
Teacher spread0.023 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations11
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Journal of Educational ResearchSame topicDoctoral Education Challenges and SolutionsFrench-language works237,207