Science education in three acts: Act 2-...the Universe(ity),... (The Term)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transformation and change. These are central concepts in the ways in which chemists think and contribute conceptually to other sciences and other human endeavors. In learning, threshold concepts are those that enable an entirely new perspective on a discipline, one that brings a deeper, perhaps transformational, understanding. Post-secondary institutions are not immune to change and transformation. Indeed, post-secondary science education, with its traditional competitive, pedantic/didactic overtones, has been undergoing such a transformation. There are a number of factors driving this transition, including student perspectives on higher education; regional, national and international changes in standards; deeper understanding of learning in science from research; and changing funding, information, political, and regulatory environments. This changing landscape presents both opportunities and challenges for higher education. This ignite presentation will start with brief audience questions on the goals of higher education. A broad discussion of these changes in teaching post-secondary science, the factors driving them, the barriers and areas of resistance, and possible future paths will be discussed within the Canadian context. In other words, what are the thresholds that must be crossed for more effective science teaching and learning? In addition to raising issues, this talk will be peppered with personal anecdotes from the speaker's three-year stint as Associate Dean, Learning and Innovation in a Faculty of Science at a large, research-intensive university to illustrate the challenges and opportunities in teaching innovation.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".