MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Beyond Summer Reading: Enabling Covert Student Learning Through a Cross-Campus Connecting Theme

2023· article· en· W4390606954 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Fiss, Brett Hamlin, Heather A. Love, Linda Ott, Charles Wallace, Steven A. Walton

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)CovertComputer scienceTheme (computing)MultimediaWorld Wide WebLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the spring of 2022, a formerly vibrant summer reading program had become moribund due to retirements and staff changes; roughly 1600 first year students were about to miss out on a longstanding and successful tradition. In response, a small group of faculty sought a way to link first-year courses between disciplines in order to boost student engagement. This group latched upon a fortuitous circumstance: the 101st anniversary of Karel Capek's play R. U.R., which gave the world the term “robot.” Thus was born Robot 101, an integrative experience connecting instructional content between courses and with a wide range of academic and artistic events outside the classroom, all centered around the multifaceted theme of “robot.” This paper details how a common theme can inform and enliven first-semester courses in engineering, composition, and computer science, as well as engage the greater university community. Our primary objective in establishing these overt connections between courses and other activities was to give students the opportunity to form their own covert connections, thereby deepening their appreciation of the interdisciplinary nature of big ideas in engineering, technology, and society. The program also provided opportunities for more advanced students to participate and make their own interdisciplinary connections. This work provides initial data and reflections on the effect of this program on student engagement and connectedness in first semester courses. We include recommendations for a scalable and sustainable program that continues thematic integration on an ongoing basis.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0110.007
Open science0.0030.020
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.008

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.397 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHigher Education Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207