MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W274276081 · doi:10.20429/ijsotl.2012.060118

A Difficult Journey: Transitioning from STEM to SoTL

2012· article· en· W274276081 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicInterdisciplinary Research and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConversationNarrativeContext (archaeology)SociologyEngineering ethicsPsychologyPedagogyEpistemologyEngineeringHistoryArtCommunicationPhilosophyLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay unearths difficulties experienced by scholars trained in the STEM disciplines when transitioning into the research context that is SoTL. We, a scientist and an engineer, engaged in a series of audiotaped reflective discussions (facilitated by a social science researcher) designed to tease out the difficulties associated with this contextual shift. Our discussions pointed to issues that go beyond the oft-quoted methodological differences of a quantitative versus qualitative approach, speaking instead to barriers associated with: time, emotions, intellectual training and world-views. Embracing a complexity approach to the generation of knowledge and understanding led us to an appreciation of the role of narrative and allowed us to dissolve dualisms that we had associated with STEM and SoTL. Our next step is to extend the conversation to include other ‘scholar-travelers’ in a series of workshops aimed at addressing the barriers and bridges associated with journeying from STEM to SoTL.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.751
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.148
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.317 · 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