MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4303833150 · doi:10.3390/logistics6040070

Student-Centered Curriculum Design and Evaluation in Logistics Management

2022· article· en· W4303833150 on OpenAlex
Sajad Fayezi

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLogistics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicStudent Assessment and Feedback
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumConstructivePlan (archaeology)Logistics managementConceptual frameworkEngineering ethicsComputer scienceMathematics educationKnowledge managementSociologyEngineering managementProcess managementPedagogyEngineeringPsychologyProcess (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: In this essay, we address an important issue in the logistics education discourse relating to student-centered curriculum design and evaluation. Methods: We adopt an integrative approach based on conceptual development and guided by constructive alignment. Results: We apply and elaborate our conceptual framework using a case of a teaching plan in logistics management. We also propose an evaluation strategy for our teaching plan in the form of a template. Conclusions: Our essay contributes to the logistics education discourse by using learning theories and developing curriculum design and evaluation guidelines that can be replicated by other educators.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.622
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.401
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