MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387845956 · doi:10.18357/otessaj.2023.3.1.43

Co-Creation During a Course: A Critical Reflection on Opportunities for Co-Learning

2023· article· en· W4387845956 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Laura A. Killam, Lillian Chumbley, Susanna Kohonen, Jim Stauffer, Jess Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Open/Technology in Education Society and Scholarship Association Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCollaborative Teaching and Inclusion
Canadian institutionsOntario College of Art and DesignAurora CollegeNipissing UniversityTrent UniversityQueen's UniversityWilfrid Laurier UniversityCambrian College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReflection (computer programming)Context (archaeology)Course (navigation)Co-creationPoint (geometry)Engineering ethicsCritical reflectionLearning designKnowledge managementSociologyPedagogyComputer scienceMathematics educationEngineeringPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Co-creation is an open practice where learners participate in decision-making about aspects of course design, which in our context has included various activities from course design to assessment decisions. After the OTESSA22 conference, this group of conference attendees reflected on co-creation practices and experiences in their respective post-secondary contexts. In this article we share reflections and challenges with co-creation as well as ideas to potentially overcome these challenges. This article, with examples shared from practice, serves as a starting point for ongoing dialogue about inclusive approaches to co-creation.

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)0.042
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.087
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0420.087
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0290.044
Scholarly communication0.0210.018
Open science0.0060.025
Research integrity0.0130.032
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.384 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Open/Technology in Education Society and Scholarship Association JournalSame topicCollaborative Teaching and InclusionFrench-language works237,207