MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307803932 · doi:10.47408/jldhe.vi25.978

The impact of departmental academic skills provision on students' wellbeing

2022· article· en· W4307803932 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Louise Frith, Leah Maitland, J. Lamont

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Learning Development in Higher Education · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Practises and Engagement
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of LeedsQueen's UniversityOxford Brookes UniversityLeeds Beckett University
KeywordsPsychologyReading (process)Higher educationAnxietyInterviewMedical educationScale (ratio)Study skillsPedagogyAcademic writingFocus groupMathematics educationSociologyPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Student wellbeing in UK higher education is of serious concern, with high rates of stress and anxiety recorded among students (Pereira et al, 2019). This is compounded for international students who speak English as a second or third language. However, international students are an integral part of higher education in the United Kingdom. Strategies that are specifically designed for international students that support wellbeing are somewhat lacking across the sector (Shu et al, 2020). The aim of this initiative is to embed academic and communication skills into students’ programmes of study in the form of weekly 2-hour academic skills classes. This small-scale study is based on the experience of teaching MA Education students, 95% of whom are Chinese. Classes focus on developing students’ understanding of critical thinking and writing, supporting their academic reading and ensuring that they understand academic conventions in the UK such as referencing and academic writing structure. Classes also provide another layer of support and social interaction for students which we hope support student wellbeing. We surveyed 40 students about how the classes support their participation and interaction, alleviate anxiety and help to develop their sense of belonging. We followed this up with students interviewing each other on their experiences of academic skills development classes. Members of the teaching team observed the interviews and took notes. This paper will report on our findings and make recommendations for how to further improve support for international PGTs.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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 venueJournal of Learning Development in Higher EducationSame topicHigher Education Practises and EngagementFrench-language works237,207