MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Phenomenology as a methodology for Scholarship of Teaching and Learning research

2019· article· en· W2933251001 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTeaching & Learning Inquiry The ISSOTL Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReflective Practices in Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhenomenology (philosophy)AffordanceScholarshipScholarship of Teaching and LearningLived experiencePhenomenonPedagogySociologyHermeneutic phenomenologyEpistemologyPsychologyMathematics educationTeaching methodTeaching and learning centerPhilosophyPolitical sciencePsychoanalysisCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) is a rich forum where scholars from different fields and philosophical orientations find space to share their research on teaching and learning in higher education. Within this paper, we will share our individual and collective experiences of why we perceive phenomenology as a methodology well-suited for a broad range of SoTL purposes. Phenomenology is a research approach that focuses on describing the common meaning of the lived experience of several individuals about a particular phenomenon. We will discuss how phenomenology informed our own SoTL research projects, exploring the experiences of faculty and undergraduates in higher education. We will highlight the challenges and affordances that emerged from our use of this methodology. Phenomenology has motivated us to tell our stories of SoTL research and within those, to share the stories that faculty and students shared.

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 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)0.123
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.099
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.497
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1230.099
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0070.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.012
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 head0.315
GPT teacher head0.563
Teacher spread0.247 · 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