MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Navigating the Lows to Gain New Heights: Constraints to SoTL Engagement

2019· article· en· W2971750917 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Andrea S. Webb

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvaluation of Teaching Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarship of Teaching and LearningPromotion (chess)ScholarshipSociologyHigher educationDeskDisciplinePedagogyPolitical scienceTeaching methodSocial scienceTeaching and learning centerPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Novice Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) leaders making the transition from scholarly teaching to SoTL to SoTL Leadership face many challenges within higher education. Not only does traditional academic culture confine most academics to disciplinary silos, but promotion and tenure requirements encourage faculty members to conduct SoTL work “off the side of their desk,” if at all (Boyer, 1990; Dobbins, 2008; Webb, Wong, & Hubball, 2013). This paper shares some of the findings from a recent study that investigated what constrained educational leaders’ understanding of SoTL while enrolled in a SoTL Leadership program at a Canadian research-intensive university. The paper will also explore implications for the support and enrichment of educational leadership.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.058
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.132

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.058
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.010
Scholarly communication0.0180.007
Open science0.0030.013
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations18
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and LearningSame topicEvaluation of Teaching PracticesFrench-language works237,207