Crossing Cultural Borders in Science: Impact of Community Based Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This case study investigated impact of community-based experiential learning (CBEL) on first year undergraduate students learning of science in Kosrae, Micronesia. The investigation involved pre- and post- CBEL reflections of individual students as well as focus group interviews with select students, which were analyzed qualitatively. The results of the study include: 1) CBEL experiences created a space for students to overcome language barriers 2) Students’ acknowledged CBEL as a platform to be encultured into the culture of science 3) Students identified CBEL experience as empowering and valuable at the personal and communal fronts. These findings suggest that CBEL proved to be an effective strategy which allowed Micronesian students to cross cultural borders and thereby, promoted their learning of science at the individual and communal level as well as promoted their sense of civic responsibility. The insights gained from this study will inform future iterations of the course. These may also inform teaching practices of other science educators in Micronesia, and in wider international contexts that value promoting cross-cultural communal learning of science.
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 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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".