Leadership, SoTL, and Mentorship in a Teaching Scholars Community of Practice
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 Teaching Scholars Program and Community of Practice (TSCoP) develops educational leadership and research through enabling reflective conversations, purposeful listening, inclusive standards, and bold thinking about Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL). Teaching Scholars lead innovative practice in their own faculty given their shared commitment to improving teaching and learning in diverse post-secondary contexts through practice focused research. In this paper, we describe how the TSCoP is both formal in structure and design, and informal and emergent in facilitated interpersonal discussions. Ongoing conversations among diverse colleagues contribute to Teaching Scholars’ reflective and reflexive practice, help each educational leader gain new insights into their own studies and expand their vision for educational leadership in higher education. We use a SoTL framework to examine and position each of our research projects, and explore and make connections with educational leadership, mentorship and SoTL research.
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 | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| 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