MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Examining the Focus of SoTL Literature—Teaching and Learning?

2021· article· en· W3135748878 on OpenAlexaff
Karen Manarin, Christine Adams, Richard Fendler, Heidi L. Marsh, Ethan Pohl, Suzanne Porath, Alison Thomas

Bibliographic record

VenueTeaching & Learning Inquiry The ISSOTL Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvaluation of Teaching Practices
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarship of Teaching and LearningScholarshipScope (computer science)Teaching and learning centerFocus (optics)Field (mathematics)PedagogySociologyTeaching methodMathematics educationPsychologyComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) claims to focus on student learning, some have argued that SoTL studies often adopt a narrow view of learning and focus more on teaching than on learning. In this paper, we explore whether teaching is the primary focus of recent articles published from 2013-2017 in three international, self-identified SoTL journals: Teaching and Learning Inquiry: The ISSOTL Journal (TLI), The International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (ijSOTL), and The Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (JoSoTL). Based on our analysis of the 299 empirical articles, we argue that they portray SoTL as a field focused primarily on teacher activity rather than student learning, despite efforts to broaden its scope.

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)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.120
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Bibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.120
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0170.021
Science and technology studies0.0030.011
Scholarly communication0.0140.015
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designObservational
DomainEvaluation
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

Citations20
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTeaching & Learning Inquiry The ISSOTL JournalSame topicEvaluation of Teaching PracticesFrench-language works237,207