MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4304080905 · doi:10.20343/teachlearninqu.10.33

Faculty and Student Partnerships in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: Evaluation of an Institutional Model

2022· article· en· W4304080905 on OpenAlexaff
Bruce Moghtader, Adriana Briseño‐Garzón, Trish L. Varao-Sousa, Ido Roll

Bibliographic record

VenueTeaching & Learning Inquiry The ISSOTL Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvaluation of Teaching Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarship of Teaching and LearningScholarshipGeneral partnershipGraduate studentsInstitutionSociologyPedagogyHigher educationMedical educationMathematics educationPsychologyTeaching methodPolitical scienceTeaching and learning centerSocial scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the design and evaluation of an institutional support model for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL): the SoTL Seed Program. In this model, faculty from across disciplines partner with graduate students with expertise in educational and social science methodologies to implement SoTL investigations. We interviewed and obtained feedback from both faculty and graduate students about their experiences. A qualitative approach based on grounded theory suggests that organized and sustained partnership between faculty and graduate students offers a viable institutional framework to support SoTL across academic disciplines. In our institution, partnerships in SoTL have resulted in facilitating academic and professional development for both faculty and graduate students, establishing communities of practice for SoTL, and providing infrastructure for systematic engagement with SoTL.

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)0.162
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.257
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1620.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0080.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.007
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 head0.430
GPT teacher head0.518
Teacher spread0.087 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTeaching & Learning Inquiry The ISSOTL JournalSame topicEvaluation of Teaching PracticesFrench-language works237,207