Completing the Research Cycle: A Framework for Promoting Dissemination of Undergraduate Research and Inquiry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the rise of undergraduate research and inquiry (UGRI) in higher education, it is important to provide students with opportunities to disseminate their research. This completes the research cycle and builds key communication skills. In this article we develop a framework for the dissemination of UGRI, linking exposure to the development of student autonomy. We illustrate the framework with case studies ranging from dissemination activities within the curriculum, such as poster presentations and journal clubs, through to UGRI journals, conferences and product launches. Finally we consider how institutions can promote and support the dissemination of UGRI. To avoid reliance on individuals, institutions should invest in appropriate infrastructure, such as an undergraduate research office, to ensure long-term support for UGR I and the promotion of dissemination activities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.403 | 0.365 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.028 | 0.025 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.028 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier 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".