Assessing Student Knowledge of Chemistry and Climate Science Concepts Associated with Climate Change: Resources To Inform Teaching and Learning
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
Climate change is one of the most critical problems facing citizens today. Chemistry faculty are presented with the problem of making general chemistry content simultaneously relevant and interesting. Using climate science to teach chemistry allows faculty to help students learn chemistry content in a rich context. Concepts related to electromagnetic radiation and gases can be taught using an understanding of climate change and how greenhouse gases work. However, it would be important to know the level of prior knowledge that the students bring to the course and their confidence in that knowledge. Thus, a two-tiered instrument was developed to measure student understanding of climate change, the behavior of gases, and the mechanism of radiative forcing by greenhouse gases. The instrument was implemented iteratively at two institutions to allow for revision and replication. The final form of the instrument may be used in general chemistry classes or interdisciplinary courses to shape and guide instruction.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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