Implementation of a Student-Customized Integrated Upper-Level Chemistry Laboratory Course
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 implementation of an integrated approach to upper-level undergraduate chemistry laboratory instruction that incorporates student choice both in the selection and sequencing of the experimental work is presented. The approach involves combining laboratory work in several traditional subdisciplinary areas of chemistry in a single course. Experimental work in emerging areas of chemistry is also incorporated, as are experiences intended to capture an interdisciplinary approach. Logistical affordances, the nature of the resulting learning environment, student responses, and faculty experiences are explored through analysis of curriculum documents and the use of student surveys. The work reveals several strengths and weaknesses in terms of logistics and learning environment, insights into how students engaged with the course and the aspect of choice, and associated benefits and challenges for faculty members. Implications for practice are presented with the aim of informing educators and institutions considering or adopting a similar approach.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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