Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter presents findings from student and staff participants who were interviewed or surveyed over the course of the research project. The research project had initially begun conducting in-person interviews at seven chosen PSIs across Canada but was halted when the COVID-19 pandemic closed campuses and then replaced with electronic surveys. Recruitment methods included posting an advert and anonymous link to the electronic survey on the social media sites of the chosen PSIs, as well as postings on the PSI’s student association or student group accounts and on the author’s Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn accounts with relevant hashtags and tags. Combining all modes of data collection resulted in 198 total participants (15 staff and 182 students) with an uneven distribution of participants among the seven PSIs. The findings reflect the participant’s understanding (and somewhat lack thereof) of consent, their perspectives on consent education, and their understanding of what programming and services are currently offered at their post-secondary institutions (PSIs). The research project revealed that 90% of respondents agreed that an online sexual consent education module should be mandatory for all students at their PSI, and an overwhelming majority (over 97%) believed that it should be mandatory for everyone, not just students.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".