University faculty perceptions and utilization of popular culture in the classroom
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article discusses results of a survey on the utilization of and attitudes and beliefs towards the use of popular culture among faculty in higher education. A total of 212 faculty members from a mid-sized public regional university provided responses, with the majority indicating that they utilize popular culture in their classroom teaching with some frequency. Overall, the sample exhibited moderately high levels of confidence in their ability to use popular culture effectively, and found popular culture to be both important to incorporate and beneficial for enhancing critical thinking. Significant differences in both frequency of use and attitudes and beliefs were found among teaching disciplines, with those in Humanities and Social Sciences utilizing popular culture more frequently and having more positive attitudes and beliefs towards popular culture than participants in natural sciences and mathematics. A set of guidelines were provided to help advance the use of popular culture in higher 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it