MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3171674516 · doi:10.20429/ijsotl.2021.150105

The SoTL Body: Identifying and Navigating Points of Entry

2021· article· en· W3171674516 on OpenAlexaff
Jessica Raffoul, Michael J. Potter, David M. Andrews

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvaluation of Teaching Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarship of Teaching and LearningDisciplineMetaphorSociologyScholarshipField (mathematics)PedagogyEngineering ethicsEpistemologyTeaching methodSocial sciencePhilosophyPolitical scienceEngineeringLinguisticsTeaching and learning center

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) as a field invites researchers to examine their teaching practice with the goal of understanding its impact and effect on student learning (Hutchings & Shulman, 1999). Though inclusive by nature – belonging to no discipline yet informing practice in all – SoTL does have its own discourse, assumptions, and literature that may intimidate disciplinary scholars. This paper uses the human body as a metaphor to explain how researchers from diverse disciplines can use familiar entry points to ease their transition into SoTL. We identify and analyze parts and systems of the human and research body, revealing connections between particular disciplinary research bodies and the SoTL research body – connections that we hope provide disciplinary scholars with the confidence they need to navigate and engage in SoTL.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.004
Science and technology studies0.0070.024
Scholarly communication0.0220.024
Open science0.0020.026
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.100
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.377 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and LearningSame topicEvaluation of Teaching PracticesFrench-language works237,207