MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2262294253 · doi:10.21100/msor.v14i2.291

What makes a successful outreach kit?

2016· article· en· W2262294253 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Anna Marie Johnson, Callum Mulligan

Bibliographic record

VenueMSOR Connections · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Systems and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTrent UniversityNottingham Trent University
KeywordsOutreachSession (web analytics)Ethnic groupMedical educationOrder (exchange)PsychologyComputer scienceMedicinePolitical scienceWorld Wide WebBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research has been carried out in order to create an effective portable maths outreach kit, using readily available sources and collating the information. The report explores the types of outreach and their benefits. Our findings indicate that an outreach session should be interactive with a range of activities. Research also showed that most young people do not see mathematics as a career option so for maths outreach to be effective there should be strong focus on linking the activities to careers. The research highlighted the importance of avoiding stereotypical views regarding gender, age and ethnicity within mathematics and other STEM careers, encouraging young people to consider a STEM career.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.898
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.318 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMSOR ConnectionsSame topicEducation Systems and PolicyFrench-language works237,207