MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953631536 · doi:10.1163/15685306-12341609

Teaching the Nonhuman Animal in Higher Education: Interdisciplinary Experiential Learning

2019· article· en· W2953631536 on OpenAlexaff
Alice J. Hovorka

Bibliographic record

VenueSociety and Animals · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnimal and Plant Science Education
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExperiential learningTransformative learningScholarshipViewpointsTheme (computing)PsychologyMultidisciplinary approachExperiential educationPedagogyHigher educationEngineering ethicsSociologySocial scienceEngineeringPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As human-animal studies ( HAS ) scholarship has grown and expanded over the past few decades, so have opportunities to bring nonhuman animals into higher education. This article presents an instructional design option for teaching the animal through interdisciplinary experiential learning. Interdisciplinary learning integrates multidisciplinary knowledge across a central theme while experiential learning encourages learners to move through a recursive process of experiencing, reflecting, thinking, and acting. The article also reflects on student learning outcomes based on a questionnaire survey conducted five years after the course completion. Preliminary insights reveal the transformative potential of this approach given students’ modified viewpoints, enhanced ethical sensitivity, enlarged horizons, and behavioral changes regarding animals. HAS scholars are encouraged to engage in animal-focused scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education by sharing instructional templates and scholarly research on HAS courses. Doing so will expand opportunities for students to appreciate, critically examine, and positively influence animal lives.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSociety and AnimalsSame topicAnimal and Plant Science EducationFrench-language works237,207