MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413812733 · doi:10.1080/1360144x.2025.2537047

“A perspective worth hearing”: exploring the impact of students as educational developers

2025· article· en· W4413812733 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Chittle, Jessica Raffoul

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal for Academic Development · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Practises and Engagement
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)PsychologyMathematics educationComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Centres for teaching and learning are frequently employing students to engage in educational development (ED) work. This study explores the impact of ED work on graduate students employed to facilitate teaching assistant development programming. Results include a summary of what motivated graduate students to apply to these positions, their perceptions of the value of ED work, including how it differs from other graduate student employment, and the transferability of these roles to future goals and careers, and the field of ED more broadly. Employing graduate students as EDs provides early-career individuals with training and experience in a field with little formalized training.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score0.806

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.518
Teacher spread0.380 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal for Academic DevelopmentSame topicHigher Education Practises and EngagementFrench-language works237,207