MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387105283 · doi:10.1515/cti-2023-0013

Conservation Science Education Online (CSEO) – A heritage science resource

2023· article· en· W4387105283 on OpenAlexaff
Alison Murray, Kyna Biggs, Aaron Shugar, Rebecca Ploeger, Erich S. Uffelman, Maartje Stols‐Witlox, Patricia Gonzales Gil, Gregory D. Smith, Maggi Loubser, Laura Fuster‐López, Giovanna Di Pietro, Anupam Sah, Austin Nevin, Arzu Sardarli, Shuya Wei, Edgar Casanova‐González

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistry Teacher International · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicConservation Techniques and Studies
Canadian institutionsFirst Nations University of CanadaQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerminologyResource (disambiguation)CurriculumCultural heritageEngineering ethicsScience educationSociologyComputer scienceMathematics educationPolitical sciencePedagogyEngineeringPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Conservation Science Education Online (CSEO) is a new online resource that shares strategies for teaching science in art conservation and related cultural heritage fields. An overview will be given of how undergraduate chemistry curricula in the United States have used examples from cultural heritage. The field of art conservation will then be described with an emphasis on the science curricula taught in art conservation programs around the world. Challenges include relating theoretical learning to real-world applications and teaching scientific terminology and concepts to students who may have limited science backgrounds; as well, there is a lack of textbooks and resources with appropriate case studies. The newly launched CSEO online resource offers freely available, effective teaching methods in the form of modules developed by international educators in the field. The inaugural CSEO Conference 2022 served as an introduction to the online resource for a global audience and was the first dedicated conference to bring together heritage science educators to discuss challenges and teaching strategies with the goal of building such a resource. The conference facilitated discussions among participants about teaching strategies, with the intention that these topics would become modules for the online resource, available to all science educators.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.487
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.259 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemistry Teacher InternationalSame topicConservation Techniques and StudiesFrench-language works237,207