MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6930034037 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.1029674

Academic Advisors And Their Diverse Advisees: Towards More Ethical Global Universities

2017· article· en· W6930034037 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal testing and alternatives
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigher educationInternationalizationJob marketCultural diversityEmployabilityInternational educationPublic university

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this comparative content analysis, job postings for academic advising personnel from U.S. and Canadian higher education institutions were examined to ascertain expectations for job candidates in terms of skills and duties, educational requirements, and compensation. Fifty-three job descriptions from 18 research-intensive, public universities were collected for this study. The findings show that institutions expect academic advisors to be multitalented and skilled professionals, but that calls for experience working with international students are limited, despite the rising importance of internationalization in higher education.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.744
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.168
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.214 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicAnimal testing and alternativesFrench-language works237,207