MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810528938 · doi:10.22329/celt.v11i0.4965

Taking Social Entrepreneurship Education to the Next Level – A Teaching and Learning Project at Renaissance College (University of New Brunswick)

2018· article· en· W2810528938 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Thomas Mengel, Maha Mohamed Tantawy

Bibliographic record

VenueCollected Essays on Learning and Teaching · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarshipCLARITYScholarship of Teaching and LearningEntrepreneurshipFocus groupMathematics educationPsychologyCourse (navigation)PedagogyHigher educationTeaching methodStudent engagementMedical educationSociologyTeaching and learning centerEngineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we present the results of a scholarship of teaching and learning research project we conducted in 2016/17 at Renaissance College, University of New Brunswick. Our case study describes the challenges and successes of the student-centered re-design of a course about social entrepreneurship, a mandatory component of an undergraduate interdisciplinary leadership program. In particular, the project aimed at improvingStudents' engagement, andStudents' satisfactionparticularly for students who start the course at a lower engagement level.We first systematically evaluated pre-existing data on earlier runs of the course. Then we conducted interviews and a focus group with graduates in 2016 which provided additional information. The analysis of this dataset informed our comprehensive and systematic evidence-based redesign of the course for the offering in the winter of 2017. Finally, we used targeted surveys in March 2017 that provided data on the results of the course redesign and on student learning.In summary, the data suggested that the redesign of this course has significantly improved students’ learning experience, the clarity of course requirements, and students’ self-directed learning. This paper may be helpful also for scholarship of teaching and learning projects in other fields of study aiming at adult learner oriented and evidence-based course redesign.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.191
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCollected Essays on Learning and TeachingSame topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207