MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Facilitating Scientific Inquiry Skills through Fiction-Based Learning

2024· article· en· W4396665273 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsMichener InstituteMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationPsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scientific inquiry skills (e.g., observation, critical analysis, hypothesis generation) are the cornerstone of scientific training, yet these skills are seldom taught. Consequently, an inquiry-based course was created at McMaster University, Science of Fictional Characters, that facilitates students to develop scientific inquiry skills. By analysing the feasibility of fictional characters in the real world, students apply and understand concepts in various scientific disciplines (e.g., biology, psychology, physics). This course embeds a variety of active learning strategies to foster the development of skills relevant to the scientific process, including group projects, written reflections, and Socratic discussions and debates. To gather student opinions about the effectiveness of the course, we administered an end-of-term survey, a modified version of the Course Interest Survey (CIS). This self-reported CIS included five subscales: student attention, relevance, confidence, satisfaction, and scientific inquiry skill development. Of the 17 surveys completed, on average the subscales scored above four on a five-point scale. Additionally, we performed a thematic analysis on 15 reflective assignments. Qualitatively, 10 codes were extracted from the student testimonies, which were grouped into four themes: student satisfaction, perceived applicability, course flexibility, and barriers to learning. Both data types revealed that students were engaged with the course and felt they improved their scientific inquiry skills. Our data further suggest the course would benefit from additional foundational scientific content. Nevertheless, the study provides an example of how fiction and an active learning model can create an engaging, skills-based learning environment in a science course.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.294 · 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