MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400321996 · doi:10.22215/rcin/m.24c1

CICP Data Literacy 1.0 - Module 1: Data in the Nonprofit Sector

2024· report· en· W4400321996 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Paloma Raggo, Caledonia Mathieson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicData Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCarleton University
KeywordsNonprofit sectorBusinessComputer scienceLiteracyData sciencePublic relationsPsychologyPolitical sciencePedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Charity Insights Canada Project’s (CICP) Community Education Centre (CEC) presents "Data Literacy 1.0," a comprehensive plan aimed at empowering individuals in Canada's nonprofit and charitable sectors with essential data literacy skills. The ability to effectively utilize data has become crucial for organizations to achieve their missions and create significant impact. This series of CEC modules is a collaborative effort to bridge the gap between data and actionable insights, providing the necessary knowledge and tools for participants at any stage of their data literacy journey. Module 1: Data in the Nonprofit Sector, serves as a foundational course, consisting of six detailed capsules that cover a spectrum of data-related topics in the nonprofit context. From data collection and sources to analysis and interpretation, each capsule is designed to not only impart knowledge but also to encourage critical thinking and practical application. This module aims to empower nonprofit professionals to use data effectively, fostering informed decision-making and driving transformative change within their organizations.

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)0.005
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0710.026

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 head0.665
GPT teacher head0.555
Teacher spread0.109 · 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
GenreOther

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Quality and ManagementFrench-language works237,207