MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3176163538

The Importance of Support Programs to Science and Technology Students Enrolled at Vancouver Island University Nanaimo, British Columbia

2016· dissertation· en· W3176163538 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sarah M. Greenway

Bibliographic record

VenueMinds at UW (University of Wisconsin) · 2016
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Systems and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyLibrary scienceEngineeringMathematics educationPsychologyComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is important to get an understanding of 1) how Science and Technology (S&T)
\nstudents feel supported at Vancouver Island University and 2) the level of knowledge of
\nthe available support programs by the faculty themselves since they are the first point of
\ncontact by students looking for guidance.
\nThis study was designed with a mixed methodology approach that included conducting
\non-line surveys and face to face interviews. Surveys were issued to S&T faculty at the
\nNanaimo Campus as well as to 400 students enrolled in S&T based courses during the
\nspring 2016 semester. Fifteen faculty and seventy student participants were asked to
\nprovide comments on how to improve the overall student experience in the upper part of
\nthe campus. Face to face interviews were conducted with 8 student volunteers. The
\nresponses provided insight to what is important to S&T students at VIU. The
\nimportance of feeling connected with other like-minded peers, and faculty were very
\nstrong factors in the overall positive academic experience.
\nThrough the use of thematic analysis, responses to the suggestions from both surveys
\nand the interview responses were coded and categorized. These major categories
\nincluded academic support programs, electronic support, social support, faculty support,
\nand program structural support, barriers to support and finally, recommendations.
\nResults showed what was important to the enrolled students were also important to the
\nfaculty: accessibility to support programs, peer support programs, feeling connected to
\nfaculty and other students, and interdisciplinary discussion. Student participants
\nexpressed the importance of social media to feel connected to the campus and further
\ndevelop student social structure.
\nDuring the interview process, barriers to accessing support were identified that included
\nfirst year struggles, scheduling, transit/parking, computer access, library access,
\nlocation and faculty access.
\nThe researcher provided a list of recommendations that may be useful for faculty and
\nVIU Administration in identifying key supports that could be offered with a science
\nbased focus in the upper campus.

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 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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.920
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMinds at UW (University of Wisconsin)Same topicEducation Systems and PolicyFrench-language works237,207