MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7034329943

Taking Stock: Contemplating North American Graduate Student Professional Development Programs and Developers

2011· article· en· W7034329943 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLincoln (University of Nebraska) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Mathematical Theories and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfessional developmentKey (lock)Graduate studentsGraduate educationHigher educationProfessional studiesBest practice
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A two-stage study was conducted to identify key competencies in graduate student development programs at Canadian and U.S. institutions. Once thirty-nine key competencies were identified, developers of graduate students were asked to rate the importance of each competency in their programming, the extent to which each competency was explicitly taught, and their own confidence in the training received to help teach these competencies. One key finding suggests that numerous potential gaps exist in the training of those who deliver graduate student development programs, which organizations such as the Professional and Organizational Development Network in Higher Education can help to address.

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)0.000
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 score0.661
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLincoln (University of Nebraska)Same topicAdvanced Mathematical Theories and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207