MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224291797 · doi:10.5430/jct.v11n4p77

Preorientation Curriculum: An Approach for Preparing Students with Heterogenous Backgrounds for Training in a Master of Biostatistics Program

2022· article· en· W4224291797 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Megan L. Neely, Jesse D. Troy, Gerald T. Gschwind, Gina‐Maria Pomann, Steven C. Grambow, Gregory P. Samsa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Teaching · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistics Education and Methodologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiostatisticsCurriculumComputer scienceModular designMathematics educationProgramming languagePsychologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe an innovative preorientation curriculum (POC) for a Master of Biostatistics (MB) program. The goal of the POC is to fill critical skills gaps for students entering the MB program from heterogeneous backgrounds so they are prepared to engage in the program’s rigorous, fast-paced training upon arrival. To achieve this goal, we introduce a structured approach to thinking that forms the foundation of a sound mental map of Biostatistics, which will assist students in their subsequent efforts to master the discipline. Based on constructivist principles, the POC covers mathematical and statistical theory, data analysis methods, programming, and statistical practice through a sequence of instruction that encourages reflection, extension, and connection between topics. The POC is modular, self-paced, and offered online via a cloud-hosted interactive learning management system (LMS). Students are required to complete the curriculum prior to the MB program orientation. We describe the rationale, design, features, and initial evaluation of the POC. Finally, to help programs interested in designing similar curricula, we provide a detailed instruction sequence description of one topic.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.005

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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Curriculum and TeachingSame topicStatistics Education and MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207