Registrar’s Advisory Committee Minutes: August 1, 2022
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Announcements: Jennifer Koontz made an announcement to the group on behalf of Standing Committee on Student Policies and Communication (a part of the Student Support Advisory Committee) regarding an upcoming discussion at RAC in the fall.For the past several months, representatives from all the undergraduate colleges have been participating in a discussion of a variety of policies, their interpretation by the colleges, and both intended and unintended consequences for colleges and students.The discussion has focused on proposing language that is meant to enforce or reinforce current policies and practices, supporting both students and staff.Future discussions at RAC and when proposed language is forwarded to SCEP will clarify when the suggested change is to actual policy language or procedures.The majority of this conversation has been about issues with the probation/suspension policy.The group has been looking for consistencies and inconsistencies and recommending language changes (that would eventually be brought to SCEP for discussion and approval), where appropriate, to accommodate differences.Some of the specific points the group has discussed are: allowing students returning from suspension to apply to a different college from the suspending college; having CAPE or the transition center get involved when appropriate; adding some language to the policy to the effect of, "students on probation should not take more than 15 credits.Colleges can recommend fewer or greater credit loads."Also, if this advice is ignored, that can be taken into consideration by the college; adding language that stipulates that students must take academic courses, though this is hard to clarify; finally, the group is proposing to add language that outlines the use of summer enrollment.Specifically, that students who are suspension eligible only be allowed to take summer classes if it's mathematically possible for them to have a positive impact on the suspension decision (this has been in place for several years, but there is currently no policy language to back up this process).Jennifer reiterated that there will be a more detailed discussion of the sub-committee's work at the September -or later -RAC meeting.The committee is still very much in the process of discussing these issues, and welcomes feedback.Kasi Williamson announced that the grades and transcripts section of the One Stop Web site is getting a facelift
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".