MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390927565 · doi:10.1515/9780776625645-014

CHAPTER 11 Teaching Active Offer: Proposal for an Educational Framework for Professors

2017· book-chapter· en· W4390927565 on OpenAlexaff
Claire‐Jehanne Dubouloz, Josée Benoît, Jacinthe Savard, Paulette Guitard, Kate Bigney

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Ottawa Press eBooks · 2017
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterprofessional Education and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationComputer sciencePedagogySociologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

N ot only do we need to train health care and social service pro- fessionals about active offer, we must also train their trainers (professors).Most professors teaching in health care and social service programs in French have not received training in teaching strategies to prepare future professionals who will one day work in minority Francophone communities.This prompted us to examine the most appropriate type of education for these professors.This chapter explores educational perspectives on andragogy and presents our conceptual framework for education, including the pedagogical setting and types of knowledge needed (content knowledge, skills [know-how], attitudes [soft skills], as well as how to put those into action [knowledge to act]), to prepare professionals to work in the area of active offer.Finally, we offer our thoughts on the particular issues and challenges of teaching active offer, as identified in a pilot project to implement education on active offer.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.010
Scholarly communication0.0130.010
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0070.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.005

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Ottawa Press eBooksSame topicInterprofessional Education and CollaborationFrench-language works237,207