Understanding How Students Navigate An Upper-Year Science Laboratory Course In A Post-Pandemic Era
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The scope of this preliminary study revolves around investigating the effectiveness of experiential learning in upper-year science laboratory courses in a post-pandemic era. In this study we have explored two key questions: 1. Can experiential learning facilitate independent inquiry in an upper-year undergraduate laboratory in a post-pandemic era? 2. Do incoming students feel prepared to carry out an in-person, hands-on, upper-year undergraduate laboratory experiments in a post-pandemic era? By exploring these questions through student reflections and perceptions in an advanced analytical chemistry inquiry-based laboratory course, we hope to acknowledge the impact the pandemic has had on first- and second-year foundational labs, and on the preparation of students for upper-year undergraduate labs. The shift towards virtual learning during the COVID-19 pandemic may have heavily impacted the development of core wet laboratory skills and thus made it challenging for students to build their confidence and skillset and attain success when challenged at a higher level.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it