MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313361322 · doi:10.37333/001c.66273

The VALUE of Community Engaged Teaching and Learning is in the Values: Advancing Students’ Learning Outcomes

2022· article· en· W4313361322 on OpenAlexafffund
Mavis Morton, Lindsey Thomson, Jeji Varghese

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Research on Service-Learning and Community Engagement · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicService-Learning and Community Engagement
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsExperiential learningConceptualizationSocial justiceScholarshipPedagogyValue (mathematics)PsychologyScholarship of Teaching and LearningActive learning (machine learning)Equity (law)Authentic learningOpen learningTeaching and learning centerMathematics educationSociologyCooperative learningTeaching methodPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Community engaged teaching and learning (CETL) is an active, authentic experiential learning pedagogy and a high impact educational practice (HIEP) that can advance undergraduate and graduate course learning outcomes. Using mixed-methods we heard from students from sociology courses about their CETL experiences. We highlight three specific insights. First, CETL can be used to achieve university-level learning outcomes. Second, CETL provides an opportunity to develop community engaged scholarship course learning outcomes linking CES principles to related knowledge, skills, and values. Third, CETL offers a unique opportunity to extend the conceptualization of civic values toward equity and social justice.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.010
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Research on Service-Learning and Community EngagementSame topicService-Learning and Community EngagementFrench-language works237,207