MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391616361 · doi:10.18260/1-2--43464

Evaluation of a Work-Integrated Learning Program for Undergraduate STEM Outreach Instructors

2024· article· en· W4391616361 on OpenAlexaff
Lisa Romkey, Daniel Munro, Virginia L. Hall, Tracy Ross

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education and Employability
Canadian institutionsActuaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutreachWork (physics)Computer scienceEngineering managementMedical educationMathematics educationEngineeringPsychologyMedicineMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evaluation of a Work-Integrated Learning Program for Undergraduate STEM Outreach InstructorsThis paper describes and evaluates a comprehensive work-integrated learning program, developed and delivered by Actua, a Canadian National STEM organization.The program provides instructors with a variety of opportunities to improve their skills, career readiness, and their employer connections and networks.The program consisted of four sets of activities: (1) A set of skills-focused training modules to prepare participants for their more immediate STEM outreach work and longer-term work readiness;(2) Industry-Led Activities and Micro-experiences;(3) Short-term internships with industry partners; and (4) a Micro-Credentials pilot program in professional communications.The programs were evaluated using a comprehensive participant survey, alongside initiative-specific surveys and interviews to gather more precise feedback.Program evaluation demonstrated a strong positive impact on the professional skills, knowledge, confidence and workforce readiness of participating post-secondary students.This program provides a novel approach for work-integrated learning, in that it places more emphasis on the employment experience than is often the case in WIL programs -that is, it focuses as much on providing learning that enhances the work experience as it does on providing work experiences that enhance the learning experience.The paper draws from social cognitive career theory and identity trajectory theory to support the evaluation of work-integrated learning programming.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHigher Education and EmployabilityFrench-language works237,207