MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7058571458

The NexSTEM Program: A Community Assets Program that Fosters the Next Generation of STEM Leaders

2020· article· en· W7058571458 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Collective Bargaining in the Academy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMagnetic Field Sensors Techniques
Canadian institutionsNexen (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterimScholarshipSocioeconomic statusPresentation (obstetrics)Community collegeRepresentation (politics)Higher educationState (computer science)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Underrepresentation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields by individuals with low socioeconomic status (SES) is a long-standing concern. Funded in late 2018, the NexSTEM Program (the “Program”) is a National Science Foundation multi-institution consortia S-STEM grant-funded program at Illinois Wesleyan University (IWU), Illinois State University (ISU), and Heartland Community College (HCC) with the goal of reducing barriers for low SES students from Central Illinois enrolling in and completing STEM degree programs at the three institutions and identifying effective, and sustainable, programmatic components. To help address barriers, the Program awards 2- and 4-year scholarships to academically successful students with significant financial need, and pairs the scholarships with multi-level mentoring, academic supports, and hands-on STEM research project involvement beginning in the first semester of college for both 2-year and 4-year students. Uniquely, HCC students who want to transfer to IWU or ISU can take their scholarship with them as they complete their 4-year STEM degree. The Program has now onboarded 2 cohorts of largely Pell-eligible first year students pursuing an eligible STEM major at one of the three IHEs. This presentation will discuss program structure, interim outcomes related to the current cohorts, and implications for the efficacy of this model in improving retention and representation in STEM.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.491
Threshold uncertainty score0.850

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.265
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.071 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Collective Bargaining in the AcademySame topicMagnetic Field Sensors TechniquesFrench-language works237,207