MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3002116947 · doi:10.24908/pceea.vi0.13819

PEER TUTORING IN A PROJECT-BASED COURSE PART 2: THE SECOND YEAR OF IMPLEMENTATION - IMPROVEMENTS AND BENEFITS

2019· article· en· W3002116947 on OpenAlex
Jean Brousseau, Andrée Sano-Gélinas, Jean-François Méthot

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Methods and Teacher Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTeamworkTUTORPeer tutorSession (web analytics)Medical educationQuality (philosophy)PsychologyMultidisciplinary approachComputer sciencePedagogyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Fall 2017, a peer-tutoring program (PTP) was implemented in a first-year multidisciplinary design course of the mechanical, electrical and electromechanical engineering programs at Université du Québec à Rimouski. Fourth-year students with relevant design experience acted as tutors for teams of first-year students. The intent was to reduce the pressure on our professional staff, while maintaining the quality of supervision. 
 PTP assessment revealed that all stakeholders appreciated the experience. At low cost, it allowed more weekly hours of supervision and freed up time for professional staff to perform tasks requiring their expertise. Although the impact of the PTP on the quality of learning was not directly measured, the student level of satisfaction was very high. However, the teaching team concluded from PTP assessment results that tutors could have more impact on teamwork and team spirit if they were better prepared. Four main areas for improvement of the PTP have been identified. Modifications for improvement of the PTP were developed as follows. Tutor training was modified to include content on teamwork, group dynamics and conflict resolution. To enhance communication between tutors and teaching team, tutors were provided with a new week-by-week guide outlining project planning and giving tutors instructions for structuring team discussions. Tutors participated in a professional co-development session in the fifth week of the project, an activity that allowed tutors to learn from each other and improve their practice. Lastly, the assessment questionnaire was improved to collect more significant data on student learning and teamwork.
 The new assessment results reveal that the changes made to the PTP have had a very positive influence on teamwork and group dynamics. Results also indicate that the improved PTP has a positive impact on achievement of course objectives. In conclusion, peer tutoring is evidently a very good strategy for supporting first-year students in the development of their design skills.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.249 · 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