Network-Based Approach to Assessment of Cognitive Skills
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
Cognitive Assessment Redesign (CAR) project is an institution-wide, network-based approach to the development of cognitive skills in undergraduate education. This project aims to encourage first and fourth-year instructors to align skill development through the design of course assessments, to enhance cognitive skill acquisition and provide a measurement of learning. The learning outcomes for the project are framed and operationalized using the language and dimensions from the Valid Assessment of Learning in Undergraduate Education (VALUE) rubrics. An assessment redesign network was created, matching assessment facilitators who have disciplinary and educational expertise with instructors to develop authentic assessments of student learning. One of the goals of the network is to encourage sustained participation and collaboration, and to build progression in teaching and learning throughout the institution. The project also includes a standardized test for comparison to course assessment outcomes. Testing at the fourth-year level has been dependent on the use of incentives for student participation. Although recruiting instructors from the faculty of Engineering and Applied Science was initially a challenge, course instructors have reported various successes stemming from participation in the project.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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