Improving the student learning experience through the student-led implementation of interactive features in an online open-access textbook
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
This case study highlights the work of Students as Partners (SaP) as a balanced approach for implementing and evaluating an online open-access textbook in introductory animal physiology at the University of Toronto Mississauga. Started in 2017 with an eCampus Ontario grant, the project involved undergraduate and graduate students developing and improving an open-access e-textbook to support student learning in a second-year undergraduate introductory animal physiology course. This case study focuses on the 2019–2020 academic term and the work of two undergraduate students working alongside faculty and two librarians. As part of their research, the partners consulted the literature and gathered feedback from students taking the course in which the open e-textbook was used. Student partners added updates and new interactive features to create a more engaging educational resource to support student learning. The partners also reflected on their role in the open educational resource development process.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| 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