Student Planners, City Futures: A CRP Documentary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Student Planners, City Futures, is a documentary following Professor Dave Amos and 22 students as they prepare a draft of Grover Beach’s General Plan Circulation Element update. Students in their final year in Cal Poly’s City & Regional Planning program take CRP410 – Community Planning Lab I and CRP 411 – Community Planning Lab II during fall and winter quarter as their capstone planning studio. Each studio completes a different project each year. For the 2024-2025 school year, Professor Amos’s section was tasked with completing a General Plan Circulation Element update for the City of Grover Beach. The film follows the studio students through all the phases of the planning process: existing conditions, visioning, goal development, policy development, and community outreach. Through these efforts, students gain a better understanding of the Grover Beach community and their vision for the future of transportation in their city. Students navigate the struggles of planning including interactions with the public, conflicting ideas, lack of engagement, and the trials and tribulation of policy writing. There is much fun to be had, as well. This includes painting buses, designing posters, and handing out Halloween candy. In the end, students reflect on what they’ve learned from the process and their time in CRP as they get ready for their next steps.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.234 | 0.053 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".