The Role of the Faculty Advisor for a Model United Nations Conference: 5 Lessons Learned from Practice
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
A Model United Nations (MUN) conference is one of Political Science’s most enduring and iconic formats for active learning and a defining event for many undergraduate students and high school students. Despite its established place in the discipline of Political Science, a MUN conference is an event that defies attempts at perfection, due mainly to the experience being out of the hands of faculty. This paper identifies five lessons learned from delivering hybrid MUN conferences at a mid-sized university campus (6,500 undergraduate students) between 2015-2019. The faculty member collaborated with upper-level undergraduate student organizers to organize and deliver conferences that included delegates participating in partial fulfillment of course credit, delegates from local high-schools, and university students participating for the experience. The connecting theme of these lessons is a consideration of achieving balance between the two roles of the participating faculty member as both the authoritative decision-maker, and that of a delegating supervisor providing oversight and allowing students the freedom to assume the responsibilities of serving as secretariat or as delegate.
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 | 0.011 | 0.071 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it