Cal Poly Psychology Class Turns $100 into $10,000
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SAN LUIS OBISPO -Several local nonprofit organizations have Cal Poly Professor Shawn Burn to thank for windfalls to their chronically tight budgets.The Cal Poly professor and associate chair of the Psychology and Child Development Department isn't a professional fund-raiser, yet she knows a thing or two about working together to raise money, and she passes that knowledge on to students in her group dynamics class.Burn, who has been incorporating the community-service aspect into her class for the past five years, estimates that her students' projects have raised more than $120,000.During fall quarter 2005, the Psychology and Child Development Department provided about $100 to help the students get started.The students then raised almost $10,000 in donations and gifts-in-kind.During the first part of the quarter, students learn how to function effectively as a group by managing controversy, creating effective communications, developing methods to promote productivity, leading groups and promoting teamwork.During the final month of class, students are organized into groups that "must democratically choose a nonprofit organization that embodies the values held by all group members," Burn said."As a whole, my students raise between $7,000 and $10,000 in just a month."The team members -working cooperatively and interdependently -must collect something quantifiable, such as money or goods that the organization needs, and then track their progress.Each group sets goals and decides how they are going to reach them.Fund-raising methods include raffles, car washes and garage sales.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
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 it