MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2349502933 · doi:10.22230/src.2016v7n1a233

Designing a culture of co-learning: Mobilizing knowledge about KTT-KMb amongst graduate students

2016· article· en· W2349502933 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Andrea LaMarre, Kate Bishop-Williams, Megan Racey, Lindsay Day, Tylar Meeks

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarly and Research Communication · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReflective Practices in Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGraduate studentsLibrary sciencePedagogySociologyPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this Field Note is to outline our experiences developing and maintaining a Knowledge Translation and Transfer-Knowledge Mobilization (KTT-KMb) Learning Circle for graduate students at the University of Guelph. Since the fall of 2013, we have planned and held events and training opportunities for graduate students across the university’s colleges and maintained an online presence for our membership of 107 students. In this article, we reflect on the successes of the Learning Circle, including a sustained presence across an interdisciplinary group, securing funding, and engaging in successful collaborations. We also highlight our challenges, including attendance at events, staying relevant in a quickly evolving field, and striving toward sustainability. Our hope is that this article provides a non-prescriptive guideline for students wishing to develop similar “by student, for student” initiatives to scaffold graduate student learning and engagement in KTT-KMb.Résumé : Dans ce field note, nous visons a surligner nos experiences en développant et maintenir un cercle d’apprentissage pour la mobilization des connaissances pour les étudiants de deuxième et troisième cycle à Université de Guelph. Depuis 2013, nous avons organise de nombreuses événements et formations pour les étudiants de toutes les collèges à l’Université; nous avons aussi maintenu un présence web pour nos 107 membres. Dans cet article, nous réfléchissons au sujet des succès du cercle, ci inclus une présence soutenu au coeur d’un nombre de membres interdisciplinaires, du succès a obtenir les fonds, et les collaborations conçus pour réaliser nos buts. Nous surlignons aussi nos defis, en tant que les difficultés attirer les étudiants aux événements, rester au courant dans une domaine en evolution, et viser à la durabilité. Nous espèrons que l’article fournira une guide non-préscrit pour les étudiants qui veulent développer des initiatives “par étudiants, pour étudiants” qui visent a soutenir les connaissances et engagement dans la domaine de la mobilisation des connaissances.Mots clés : Mobilization des conaissances; Partage du savoir; Étudiants; Formation; Communauté de practique

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.017
Scholarly communication0.0160.008
Open science0.0030.024
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.207
GPT teacher head0.539
Teacher spread0.332 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarly and Research CommunicationSame topicReflective Practices in EducationFrench-language works237,207