Instructor-Blinded Study of Pharmacy Student Learning When a Flipped Online Classroom Was Implemented during the COVID-19 Pandemic
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
A multi-cohort instructor-blinded research study was completed at the School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo, to test the impact on study learning endpoints when an online flipped classroom teaching style was implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic. The learning endpoints were gain in factual knowledge and gain in self-confidence in clinical skills (assessing a patient, developing a care plan for a minor ailment, and implementing the care plan by counselling patients on the condition). Gain in factual knowledge was assessed with an instructor-blinded multiple-choice test administered before and after the course. Gain in self-confidence in clinical skills was assessed with a survey asking students to report their self-confidence in completing 10 clinical tasks on a 5-item Likert scale. Students being taught in an online flipped classroom cohort during the COVID-19 pandemic trended toward having a higher gain in self-confidence throughout the course but a lower gain in factual knowledge when compared with a traditional classroom cohort in the previous year.
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 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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