MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Joining a Scholarly Conversation: Publishing Your SoTL Work

2020· article· en· W3097216640 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Magdalen Normandeau, Klodiana Kolomitro, Patrick Maher

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReflective Practices in Education
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConversationScholarshipCraftPublishingSociologyPolitical scienceArtVisual artsLiteratureCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The path to publication is often long, emotional, and bewildering. We share key insights from our experience as authors, educators, and members of the editorial board with The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning that we hope will help authors better understand and navigate the path to publication. In writing a compelling story, we suggest that it is necessary to join a conversation with self, the scholarly community, and the journal. We unpack each of these dimensions and offer considerations on how to craft a powerful manuscript that could ultimately get published.

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)0.072
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.258
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score0.380

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0720.258
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0420.032
Scholarly communication0.0710.038
Open science0.0040.025
Research integrity0.0210.033
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.026

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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.239 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and LearningSame topicReflective Practices in EducationFrench-language works237,207