A collaborative approach to developing transferable teaching skills among student workshop facilitators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The teaching assistant program at the University of Windsor facilitates opportunities for students to develop leadership capacity, creativity, and pedagogical knowledge. This study explored the skills that student workshop facilitators were developing and/or enhancing, and how these skills might be used outside of teaching-related duties. Data from former student workshop facilitators were collected through an online survey (n = 15) and semi-structured interviews (n = 6). The results indicated that participants developed a range of teaching-related skills through leading teaching and learning workshops. The knowledge and skills facilitators garnered often resulted in them being perceived as teaching and learning leaders amongst their peers. Further, participants emphasized that leading workshops provided a unique opportunity to practice, increased their confidence, and led them to apply their skills in academic and non-academic endeavours. Le programme d’assistanat d’enseignement de l’Université de Windsor aide les étudiants à acquérir des compétences en matière de leadership, de créativité et de connaissances pédagogiques. Dans notre étude, nous nous penchons sur les compétences que les étudiants animateurs d’ateliers ont assimilées ou affinées et nous nous demandons comment ces acquis peuvent être transposés à d’autres tâches en dehors de l’enseignement. Au moyen d’un sondage en ligne (n = 15) et d’entrevues semi-structurées (n = 6), nous avons recueilli les données provenant d’étudiants ayant animé des ateliers. Les résultats indiquent que les répondants ont développé diverses compétences liées à l’enseignement en animant des ateliers portant sur l’apprentissage et sur l’enseignement. Grâce aux connaissances et aux compétences acquises, les animateurs étaient souvent considérés par leurs pairs comme des leaders en matière d’apprentissage et d’enseignement. De plus, les répondants ont souligné le fait que l’animation d’atelier leur avait donné l’occasion d’exercer leur pratique, de gagner en confiance et d’appliquer leurs compétences en contexte universitaire et non universitaire.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.022 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".