MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307446376 · doi:10.1177/20569971221130009

Thinking theologically about student success: Higher education with a higher calling

2022· article· en· W4307446376 on OpenAlexaff
Theodore F. Cockle, Sinda K Vanderpool, David Q Hao

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Christianity & Education · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Research Studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarshipFaithStudent engagementHigher educationUtilitarianismSociologyBridge (graph theory)Transactional leadershipAestheticsTheologyPedagogyEpistemologyPhilosophyPsychologySocial psychologyLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scholarly definitions of student success have become increasingly transactional and thereby reflect a specific form of modern utilitarianism. In this paper, we use a theological map to explore the terrain of contemporary student success scholarship and practice in an effort to re-imagine how the Christian faith might animate a vision of student success for scholar-practitioners. First, we review the current scholarly landscape, second, we show where it falls short. Third, we use the practical theological method to outline a theological vision of student success. Finally, we propose ways to bridge the gap between current practice and theological vision.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.570
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.377 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Christianity & EducationSame topicHigher Education Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207