Student Produced Videos - An Innovative and Creative Approach to Assessment
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability to think critically and creatively are essential graduate attributes for science students yet many science graduates lack these skills and may struggle to gain employment. As undergraduate science educators, we are aiming to improve critical thinking, creativity and the promotion of deeper learning in our students. We have designed and implemented an innovative and creative approach to assessment to engage students with laboratory practicals, which are a core component of the biomedical sciences at Monash University. Through the introduction of an innovative approach to assessment using small group student produced videos, we aim to improve skills in theoretical understanding, data analysis and presentation.This paper details the design of instructional guidelines for small group student produced video assessment, the implementation of the video assessment into 2nd and 3rd year biochemistry laboratory practical classes and the generation of research outcomes and evaluation of this novel assessment technique. Observation of student behaviour during the laboratory classes found students were filming/photographing their experiments and appeared far more engaged with the actual experiments than in previous years. In addition, many student videos demonstrated high levels of creativity and critical thinking. The student produced video assessment did provide an opportunity for creative and critical thinking in students but there are still aspects to be improved.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it