MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2884912175 · doi:10.4995/head18.2018.7942

Layering Learning for Work-Readiness in a Science Programme

2018· article· en· W2884912175 on OpenAlexaff
Marianne McKay, Antoinette R. Smith-Tolken, Anne Alessandri

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicService-Learning and Community Engagement
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternshipEmployabilityMedical educationWork (physics)PsychologyPedagogyMathematics educationEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to prepare our students for a challenging workplace, the Department of Viticulture and Oenology at Stellenbosch University in South Africa have ‘layered’ Engaged Learning strategies throughout the four-year undergraduate degree in an approach that is innovative in a science-based programme. In this research project, we assessed the effects of service-learning (SL) and a six-month internship on student employability by analysing reflections that were collected over a number of years. We also asked industry members whether they felt students had improved in key areas after the final year internship. The student submissions for SL showed evidence of personal growth and transformation, and those for the internship reflected industry requirements for professional skills in a complex and technically demanding milieu. It was found that these engaged experiences provided sound preparation for working life, as well as giving students opportunities for self-questioning and personal growth, which is unusual in the natural sciences learning environment.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicService-Learning and Community EngagementFrench-language works237,207