MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4254083652 · doi:10.47678/cjhe.v49i3.188493

Perceptions of Institutional Teaching Culture by Tenured, Tenure-track, and Sessional Faculty

2019· article· en· W4254083652 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Debra Dawson, Ken N. Meadows, Erika Kustra, Kathryn D. Hansen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Higher Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvaluation of Teaching Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorWestern University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPerceptionMedical educationHigher educationUniversity facultyOrganizational culturePsychologyFaculty developmentQuality (philosophy)MedicinePolitical sciencePublic relationsProfessional development

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Institutional Teaching Culture Perception Survey (ITCPS) was used to investigate beliefs of tenured, tenure-track, and sessional faculty members (N=576) about the teaching culture within three large research-intensive universities in Canada. As predicted, we found significant differences between these three groups of faculty members’ perceptions of their institutions’ teaching cultures. Sessional faculty perceived that their universities rewarded effective teaching less than their tenured or tenure-track colleagues. Tenured faculty were less likely than the tenure-track and sessional faculty to believe it was important to encourage, recognize, or assess effective teaching. These results have important implications for the quality of teachingand, ultimately, student learning, as sessional faculty are teaching an increasing number of students and tenured faculty are the primary decision-makers in setting the priorities for their institutions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.321
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.375 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Higher EducationSame topicEvaluation of Teaching PracticesFrench-language works237,207