Experientially Learning and Teaching in a Student-Directed Classroom
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
There exists a relatively coherent body of research relevant to problem-based and transformational learning but too few studies that have empirically explored the many anecdotal claims of the attributes of experiential, student-directed pedagogy. The purpose of this present study was to explore students’ and professor experiences with/in a student-directed experiential education elective course. What successes and challenges do students and the professor experience and how? What surprises, new learnings, and pedagogical risks ensue? The primary results include (a) Student Responsibility and Accountability, (b) Structure, (3) Role of the Professor, (4) Experiences With Self-Study Participation, and 5) Informing and Transforming Practice. These results and the review of literature add to the body of knowledge relevant to “doing” student-directed experiential education and Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) in the postsecondary classroom.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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