Science communication skills as an asset across disciplines: A 10-year case study of students’ motivation patterns at Université Laval
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the demand for science communication proficiency is growing and post-secondary science communication courses and programs are launched or redesigned, it is paramount to understand who takes these courses and why. Based on a convergent mixed methods approach, this article explores the characteristics and self-reported motivations of students enrolled in an online science communication course at Université Laval, Canada, from 2009 to 2018. Results show that the typical science communication student is a woman with a career-orientated motivation pattern, mostly seeing science communication skills as an asset for a career in communication, science, or health. Be it career-driven, interest-driven, or online education-driven, motivation pattern differences emerge depending on the students' gender or field of study. Those patterns offer new paths of research, such as exploring the impact of science communication program design or of advertising strategies on enrollment.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it