MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2259985199

Survey of Biology Capstone Courses in American and Canadian Higher Education: Requirement, Content, and Skills.

2015· article· en· W2259985199 on OpenAlexaffabout
Neil Haave

Bibliographic record

VenueBioscene: The Journal Of College Biology Teaching · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapstoneCapstone courseMedical educationMathematics educationBiologyPsychologyMedicineMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Capstone experiences have high educational impact with various approaches available for biology. However, no information exists regarding the pervasiveness of capstone courses in Canadian and American biology programs. This study surveyed the prevalence and character of biology capstone courses in the USA and Canada. The survey included a majority of public institutions offering primarily undergraduate programs. Seventy percent of American biology degree programs required a capstone course vs 27% of Canadian schools. Large and graduate institutions were less likely to require a capstone course. Medium-sized institutions were more likely to deliver their biology capstone course as a seminar, whereas small institutions were more likely to include an undergraduate research experience. Sixty percent provided some review of biology’s conceptual foundations, but most capstone courses devote little time considering the history or philosophy of biology. Most schools included the development of students’ writing, speaking, and thinking as learning objectives. Research skills were significantly less likely to be a learning objective. Although biological capstone courses may intend to integrate students’ biological knowledge, educators also need to consider how that knowledge could be synthesized into students’ entire education.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designObservational
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 venueBioscene: The Journal Of College Biology TeachingSame topicGenetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical ResearchFrench-language works237,207