As easy as 1-2-3? Reflections on a programme redesign: Implementing the 1-2-3 delivery model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transition has long been a key concern for higher education institutions. This paper reflects on the redesign of a Liberal Arts Foundation Year to explore better ways of considering transition as an ongoing and complex process rather than as a specific moment at the start of the academic year. In particular, the implementation of a 1-2-3 programme structure allowed the programme to more fully address the nuances of transition and student support across the academic year. This structure facilitated a more gradual adjustment to university study, with a single ‘short fat’ module at the point of entry followed by two mid-length modules taken concurrently for the remaining two-thirds of Semester 1. Students then follow the typical undergraduate structure of three concurrent, semester-long, modules in Semester 2. This redesign prompted a reconsideration of the Foundation Year’s position as part of wider institutional structures, and contributed to improved student satisfaction with modules and improved academic results across the cohort.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".