Different strategies to facilitate meaningful reflections among post-secondary students in a community service learning water project
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explored how continuous diverse reflective exercises embedded in a Community Service Learning chemistry lab support science students' meaningful learning. The findings of this study are intended for those involved in teaching natural science in higher education, as well as those interested in Community Service Learning, self-directed learning, and reflective strategies. Fourteen students in a second-year Analytical Chemistry II lab participated in this study. Reflective exercises representing multiple modes of reflection were purposefully designed and embedded across the lab curriculum. Qualitative content analysis of data from reflective writings, scrapbook reflections, and reflective discussions demonstrates that students were able to articulate their self-directed learning from the perspective of academic enhancement, personal growth, and civic engagement in the different reflective exercises. Students indicated a high level of satisfaction, agreed that the integration of diverse continuous reflective strategies can enhance their transformative learning practice in an engaging way, and would like to continue this practice for other science laboratory courses.
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 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 | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it