Bibliographic record
Abstract
Providing support services and programs to undergraduate students is well recognized as of critical importance in the United States, where many graduate programs and specialized training opportunities exist for student services professionals to learn about the unique and diverse population known as traditional undergraduate students. In Canada, the academic and professional development opportunities for studying undergraduate education are significantly limited. This project is an exploration of the theoretical perspectives of student development theory and a review of academic literature to determine the unique characteristics, barriers, motivations, and teaching strategies for both traditional undergraduate students and adult learners. The purpose is to consider how adult learning principles can apply to undergraduate students. \nIn considering how to best meet the needs of undergraduate students, a workshop series was created to enhance professional development opportunities for individuals who provide programs and services to undergraduate students at one mid-sized Canadian University. The workshops seek to encourage participants to consider the characteristics, barriers, and motivations of traditional undergraduate students from the theoretical perspective of student development theory and adult learning principles. The workshops incorporate a review of adult learning principles and how they can be applied when providing programs and services to undergraduate students. The workshops have been designed as a four-workshop series to be offered sequentially between October and March. Workshops may be taken individually but are designed as a series where knowledge builds over the course of the workshops.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".