MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809751980 · doi:10.22329/celt.v11i0.4964

Shoes for the Shoemaker’s Children: Providing an Accreditation Process for Programs Offered by Educational Developers

2018· article· en· W2809751980 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Celia Popovic, Mandy Frake-Mistak, Alison Jeppesen, Cynthia Korpan, Suzanne Le‐May Sheffield, Mark Weyers

Bibliographic record

VenueCollected Essays on Learning and Teaching · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvaluation of Teaching Practices
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityDalhousie UniversityUniversity of VictoriaRed Deer PolytechnicYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccreditationCaucusMedical educationProcess (computing)Quality (philosophy)PedagogyPsychologyEngineeringPolitical scienceMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Educational developers in universities and colleges design, develop, and deliver courses and programs for professors and teaching assistants (TAs) to support teaching and learning in postsecondary institutions. While courses that professors and TAs teach are often accredited by the institution or a professional body, courses offered by educational developers are often not accredited at all. With this anomaly in mind, the Educational Developers Caucus (EDC) created a working group to first explore the appetite for a Canadian accreditation process, and then to design and implement a framework. This article describes the process and product of the accreditation working group and reports on an initial evaluation of its impact, arguing for its valuable contribution to enhancing the quality of faculty and TA development programs and courses and thereby of teaching and learning.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.575
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0080.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.443
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCollected Essays on Learning and TeachingSame topicEvaluation of Teaching PracticesFrench-language works237,207