MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383343226 · doi:10.1353/csd.2023.a901172

Service-Learning as Entry Into or Enhancement of University Volunteering? Student Characteristics at an Elective Service-Learning Institution

2023· article· en· W4383343226 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of college student development · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicService-Learning and Community Engagement
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsService-learningService (business)CourseworkPsychologyMedical educationContext (archaeology)Student engagementProsocial behaviorPedagogyMedicineSocial psychologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Service-learning is a pedagogical practice that enhances university coursework through volunteering. Current challenges for the field are understanding the benefits of service-learning in relation to volunteering and with regard to pre-service student characteristics. Although students are the focus of service-learning research and practice, understanding how institutions structure service-learning is needed to appreciate its benefits. A model of institutional structuring of service-learning (offered or not, elective or mandatory) is presented. The model is used to inform a study of the academic, psychological, and prosocial characteristics among 266 undergraduate students enrolled in an elective service-learning course at a single large Canadian public university. The study revealed four groups of students: (a) service-learners with prior volunteer engagements, (b) volunteers, (c) non-volunteers, and (d) service-learners with no prior volunteer engagements. The paper is the first to identify and examine service-learners with no prior volunteer engagements and to situate these students in the context of other service-learners, volunteers, and non-volunteers. Although service-learners with prior volunteer engagement resembled volunteers, service-learners with no other volunteer engagement differed from all other groups. The findings are discussed with regard to the benefits of service-learning and volunteering in a variety of institutions.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.316
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.291 · 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