MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406928806 · doi:10.20343/teachlearninqu.13.2

Reimagining Student Success through Engagement and Soft Outcomes: Learning from a Capstone Course in a Canadian Polytechnic

2025· article· en· W4406928806 on OpenAlexafffundabout
A. Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueTeaching & Learning Inquiry The ISSOTL Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education and Employability
Canadian institutionsNorthern Alberta Institute of Technology
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta Innovates
KeywordsStudent engagementCapstoneScholarship of Teaching and LearningPedagogyHigher educationMathematics educationExperiential learningMedical educationSoft skillsPsychologyTeaching methodPolitical scienceMedicineComputer scienceTeaching and learning center

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper uses a capstone class in the bachelor of technology program at Northern Alberta Institute of Technology (Canada) as a case study for reimagining a “successful” student and promoting growth in a variety of learners. In this course, students, guided by faculty advisors, work in teams to address real-world projects solicited by individuals or organizations. Over two years, feedback was gathered through interviews and surveys with graduating students and alumni to identify opportunities for improvement and to gain deeper insight into students’ learning experiences. The authors analyze these responses through the lens of scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL), particularly through literature on soft outcomes. In comparison to hard outcomes like grades or completing a degree, soft outcomes capture student advancement toward the goals of a particular course and can include interpersonal, organizational, and internal development. Ultimately, we conclude that our course promotes students’ progress toward soft outcomes through their relationships with their project sponsors, instructors, and teammates. Our findings emphasize the importance of fostering students’ social, emotional, and personal growth and suggest that the students who might be perceived as low-achieving can still advance as much on their learning journey as the ones who would be traditionally lauded as high-achieving. We align our findings with scholarship that investigates students’ emotional growth and wellbeing, which can be difficult amidst pedagogy, research, and government policy that define the value of post-secondary education primarily in terms of its ability to prepare students for the job market. This paper reframes what being a successful student means, contributes to a wider body of research on soft outcomes, and provides valuable insight for educators and researchers who are invested in students’ engagement.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.543

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.001
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.366 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTeaching & Learning Inquiry The ISSOTL JournalSame topicHigher Education and EmployabilityFrench-language works237,207