Bibliographic record
Abstract
Citation (2016), "List of Contributors", Emerging Directions in Doctoral Education (Innovations in Higher Education Teaching and Learning, Vol. 6), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. ix-x. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2055-364120160000006004 Publisher: Emerald Group Publishing Limited Copyright © 2016 Emerald Group Publishing Limited Brian D. Agnew The Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital, New Brunswick, NJ, USA Julia Alessandrini University of Notre Dame Australia, Fremantle, Western Australia Laurien Alexandre Antioch University, Yellow Springs, OH, USA Kimberly R. Allen Maryville University, St. Louis, MO, USA Patrick Blessinger International HETL Association, NY, USA; St. John’s University, Queens, NY, USA Nancy J. Brooks Ball State University, Muncie, IN, USA Anthony Clarke University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Judith Beth Cohen Lesley University, Cambridge, MA, USA Julia Connell University of Technology Sydney, New South Wales, Australia Wolfgang Deicke Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany Maria Dwyer Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA Marc Fellman University of Notre Dame Australia, Fremantle, Western Australia Karen L. Ford Ball State University, Muncie, IN, USA Kem M. Gambrell Gonzaga University, Spokane, WA, USA Jo Ann Gammel Endicott College, Beverly, MA, USA Ralph A. Gigliotti Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA Christine Goldthwaite Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA Kathleen M. Haywood University of Missouri-St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA Gerard Hoyne University of Notre Dame Australia, Fremantle, Western Australia Harry Hubball University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Jeffrey M. Keefer New York University, New York City, NY, USA Grace McCarthy University of Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia Johannes Moes Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany Felicita A. Myers University of Missouri-St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA Gale Parchoma University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada Elena Yu. Polush Ball State University, Muncie, IN, USA Jessica L. Riviere Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA Brent D. Ruben Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA Amy Rutstein-Riley Lesley University, Cambridge, MA, USA Surabhi Sahay Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA Sally Sambrook Bangor University, Wales, UK Johannes Siemens Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany Denise Stockley Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada Lazarina N. Topuzova Gonzaga University, Spokane, WA, USA Elise van den Hoven University of Technology Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands Andrea Webb University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Jon F. Wergin Antioch University, Yellow Springs, OH, USA Book Chapters Emerging Directions in Doctoral Education Innovations in Higher Education Teaching and Learning Emerging Directions in Doctoral Education Copyright Page List of Contributors Foreword Series Editor’s Introduction Part I: Concepts and Principles Innovative Approaches in Doctoral Education: An Introduction to Emerging Directions in Doctoral Education Doctoral Education for the Future: Through the Looking Glass Scholar-in-Training; Leader-in-Training: The Rutgers University PreDoctoral Leadership Development Institute Managing the Psychological Contract within Doctoral Supervisory Relationships Part II: Successful Practices Disciplinarity Issues in Educational Technology Doctoral Supervision Living Theory in Action: Preparing a New Generation of Educational Researchers Creating a Decolonized Alliance: American Indian and Alaska Native Doctoral Leadership Program Collision and Coalescence – German and British Cultures in Doctoral Education Client-Based Dissertations in Practice Learning like Adults: A Hybrid Interdisciplinary Doctoral Program for Mid-Career Professionals Applying Self-Determination Theory to Improve Completion Rates in a Part-time Professional Doctorate Program Differentiation and Integration: Managing the Paradox in Doctoral Education Qualified … for What? The Potential for Qualifying Exams to Become Meaningful Professional Milestones Joint Doctoral Supervision across Countries: Changes, Challenges and Considerations Developing Institutional Leadership for the Scholarship of Graduate Student Supervision: Lessons Learned in a Canadian Research-Intensive University About the Authors Author Index Subject Index
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.299 | 0.004 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".