Bibliographic record
Abstract
The wired classroom Dream and realityby Peggy White and Shauna Rutherford D oes space affect teaching?Picture your self at the front of a large, im personal lecture theater facing 250 strangers or in a s airless, poorly designed room.Connecting with students can be a difficult challenge under ei ther of these circum stances, even for gifted educators, but it is even more difficult for those with average instructional skills.The book Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education provides guidelines to som e of the critical elem ents that contribute to effective teaching and learning: "G ood practice: Encourages student faculty interaction Encourages cooperation among students Encourages active learning Gives prom pt feedback Emphasizes time on task Communicates high expectations R espects diverse talents a n d w ays of learning."1Intuiting from these principles, it appears obvious that som e spaces are m ore contribu tory to teaching and learning than others.A good instructional space should facilitate and enable "good practice."Does the traditional library classroom setting do this?Decidedly not.Neutrality is often the best it achieves.There is little opportunity for instructor/student in teraction, active learning, collaboration, or feed back.It is the teacher w ho spends "tim e on m task" not the student.In fact, while teaching is occurring, learning is moot.ll, Traditional classrooms also do not meet the standards and expectations of today's under graduates.Members of Generation Y are often criticized for their short attention span, but author D on Tapscott proposes that they really just have a different way of learning and an intolerance for boredom .2There is a big dif ference.Students w ho are engaged in their learning will be attentive, but engaging them is not necessarily easy.Unlike professors w ho have an entire term to build relationships with students and gain their confidence and respect, most librarians have one class period (often not more than 50 minutes) to "make it or break it."And it is no secret that the research process does not en thrall, so anything w e can do to make the ses sion more interactive, interesting, and m ean ingful is crucial if learning is to take place.The right space promotes this and gives us that op portunity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.022 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.004 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".