Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Carnegie Foundation's initiative to promote the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) through the Carnegie Academy for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (CASTL) program ended in October 2009.The Carnegie Affiliates were a collection of 17 diverse institutions in the United States and Canada that chose to make a connection to the CASTL program within its last three years, several within the last year of the program.Each Affiliate agreed to explore the place of SoTL work in its institution, and to undertake activities that would provide support and recognition for ongoing inquiry into evidence-based improvement of student learning.In response to many questions posed about the sustainability and future of SoTL, this article reveals the Affiliates' viewpoint on these critical issues.Findings from their self-study indicate specific factors that led institutions to "officially" connect to the SoTL movement and the benefits that accrued as a result.Based on their collective experience and self-study, and informed by reflective discussions held at the final convening on October 21, 2009, the Affiliates offer lessons-learned and suggestions for colleagues or institutional leaders who are seeking perspectives and information about institutionally engaging with SoTL.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".