MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2755795225 · doi:10.1002/tl.20242

Editors' Notes

2017· article· en· W2755795225 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

VenueNew Directions for Teaching and Learning · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Practices and Challenges
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMillerCitationLibrary scienceEditorial boardComputer scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This special issue demonstrates how “Decoding the Disciplines” not only provides a framework for inquiry into teaching and learning disciplinary concepts, but also holds much potential for bridging disciplinary thinking and teaching practice across disciplines, and serving as a tool for both teaching and curriculum development. In Chapter 1, together with our Faculty Learning Community (FLC) co-authors, we describe the “Decoding the Disciplines” FLC at Mount Royal University, including how it started as a faculty development initiative, and how it developed into various teaching, curriculum, and research projects which are presented in detail in subsequent chapters. We hope that others will use and extend this work to inform ways of thinking, practicing, and being for both teaching and learning in higher education.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0110.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.351 · 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