MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2522841985 · doi:10.1108/ijshe-04-2015-0082

Combining forces

2016· article· en· W2522841985 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alison Munro, Jean Marcus, Katie Dolling, John Robinson, Jennifer Wahl

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicService-Learning and Community Engagement
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternshipGeneral partnershipSustainabilityOriginalitySociologyProgram evaluationWork (physics)Public relationsHigher educationPedagogyPolitical scienceMedical educationEngineeringPublic administrationQualitative researchMedicineSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This paper describes the sustainability partnership between the City of Vancouver and the University of British Columbia (UBC) and, in particular, the co-curricular Greenest City Scholars graduate student internship program, which has been developed by the two organizations. Through the program, UBC graduate students work on projects at the City that help to advance sustainability targets. The paper aims to explore the successes, challenges and lessons learned from the program. Design/methodology/approach This case study uses literature and document review, observations, program participant evaluation surveys and project impact survey feedback. Findings The Greenest City Scholars program model has contributed to the sustainability goals at UBC and the City of Vancouver and has supported the partnership between the two organizations. The program has grown over its five-year history and is considered to be a central part of the partnership. Breadth of student participants from across the university and high participation from City departments have been achieved. The model is now being adapted to be delivered within other partnerships. Practical implications The experiences presented in this case study can help other higher education institutions understand how a co-curricular graduate student work experience program could help to bolster their own sustainability partnerships. Originality/value This paper makes a contribution by providing insight into the use of a graduate student program to advance the goals of a university–community sustainability partnership.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.215
Threshold uncertainty score0.718

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.005
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0020.014
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2150.052

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.347 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations18
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainability in Higher EducationSame topicService-Learning and Community EngagementFrench-language works237,207