MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2409367736 · doi:10.1002/tl.20185

The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) at Renaissance College (University of New Brunswick): A Case Study of SoTL at the Faculty Level

2016· article· en· W2409367736 on OpenAlexaffabout
Thomas Mengel

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Directions for Teaching and Learning · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOrganizational Strategy and Culture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarship of Teaching and LearningScholarshipThe RenaissanceContext (archaeology)SociologyHigher educationPedagogyMathematics educationTeaching and learning centerTeaching methodPsychologyPolitical scienceArtArchaeologyGeographyArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter presents the case study of Renaissance College at the University of New Brunswick, discussing the faculty's achievements, challenges, and outlook for the future in the context of the scholarship of teaching and learning in Canada.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.810

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0340.016
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0030.010
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
DomainMethods
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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Directions for Teaching and LearningSame topicOrganizational Strategy and CultureFrench-language works237,207