MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308875491 · doi:10.3389/fbioe.2022.1046723

The BioExperience Research and Entrepreneurship Challenge: An iGEM-inspired applied research program for BIOSTEM talent and skills development

2022· article· en· W4308875491 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Hertek Gill, Mahdi Ahsan, Victoria Feng, Jessie Pearce, Tarasha Sharma, Austin Boucinha, Mads Kærn

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomedical and Engineering Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFaculty of Health Sciences, University of OttawaUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsExperiential learningPreparednessMedical educationEntrepreneurshipPsychologyCompetition (biology)Work (physics)PedagogyPolitical scienceEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Post-secondary education is falling behind in delivering the talent and skills development needed to support the growth of biology-based economies and the demands of professional and research-based graduate degree programs. Here, we describe an applied research program, the BioExperience Research and Entrepreneurship Challenge, launched in May 2020 to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on undergraduate experiential learning programs at the University of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. The program provided undergraduates with meaningful talent and skills development opportunities by implementing a student-centred, project-based learning approach inspired by the International Genetically Engineered Machine (iGEM) competition. We present evidence from participant exit surveys suggesting that the program delivers a high-quality learning environment and improves learning outcomes compared to traditional work-integrated learning. Notably, 84% of respondents reported an excellent or exceptional learning experience and significant or profound improvements in skills, such as leadership (72% of respondents), problem-solving (42% of respondents) and research preparedness (52%) that are difficult to develop in conventional academic programs. Remarkably, 60% of respondents report that the job-readiness training provided by the program is better or much better than traditional work-integrated learning. Our study demonstrates that a cost-effective and scalable alternative to the iGEM competition can improve talent and skills development in BIOSTEM fields.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.565

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.268 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Bioengineering and BiotechnologySame topicBiomedical and Engineering EducationFrench-language works237,207