MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Moving toward belonging in a physics department: What changes are possible with and without a paradigm shift?

2025· article· en· W4407952648 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Physics Education Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvaluation of Teaching Practices
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParadigm shiftPhysicsPsychologyMedicineQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Belonging in a discipline or department is an important aspect of people’s persistence in that discipline or department, especially for undergraduate students. Previous research has shown that increasing student feelings of belonging in a department benefits all students and is even more valuable for women, racialized people, and other underrepresented groups. However, helping students to develop feelings of belonging can be difficult and complex. This article presents data from a larger, primarily qualitative case study that was conducted at a research-based university in Canada. It examines how a group of faculty, staff, and students worked toward building community and cultivating belonging in their physics department. The aspects of this process that the professor and student participants experienced, and the challenges and rewards encountered, are described and explained here. Some of the strategies that professor participants undertook were relatively easily accomplished using what we describe here as a “classical” paradigm; the analogy is to the traditional physics culture. One example of a strategy employed under the classical paradigm is hosting a mentoring program for physics majors. Other strategies were quite challenging for many professor participants and required a paradigm shift toward more progressive views, which, following the analogy, we call a “quantum” paradigm. An example is believing and behaving as though students with B grades belong and can succeed in physics. We suggest that the paradigm shift from classical (traditional thinking) to quantum (progressive) is an important barrier that members of the physics community must recognize and overcome to fully address student participation and experiences in physics, although some changes were still possible without making the paradigm shift. The study found a new difference between feeling welcome and feeling a sense of belonging among students, as well as a similar difference among faculty members. We present possible steps that physics faculty and staff may consider along the road to recruitment and retention in physics, which are notable for departments and instructors interested in improving student outcomes, departmental sustainability, and equity, diversity, and inclusion.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.392
Threshold uncertainty score0.642

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.185
GPT teacher head0.541
Teacher spread0.356 · 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