MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1539541080

A Comparison of Online and Traditional Computer Applications Classes

2001· article· en· W1539541080 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Linda W. Cooper

Notice bibliographique

RevueTHE journal · 2001
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueOnline and Blended Learning
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésThe InternetClass (philosophy)Mathematics educationQuarter (Canadian coin)PopulationIntranetFlexibility (engineering)PsychologyMedical educationComputer scienceMedicineDemographyMathematicsWorld Wide WebSociologyGeographyStatisticsArtificial intelligence
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

With working adults occupying an increasingly large percentage of our college population and with greater numbers of students having computer and Internet experience prior to entering college, opportunities are being made to better meet their needs, interests and work schedules through online classes. In fact, according to International Data, e-learning market, which includes Internet and Intranet courses, will grow from $4 billion to $15 billion worldwide [between 1998 and 2002] (Del 2000). Although students who enroll in online classes generally like the flexibility and convenience they offer, there continues to be concern about instructional (Terry 2000). Many question whether students in online classes learn as much or receive the same quality of instruction as students in the traditional classroom. This study compares online instruction and traditional or in-class instruction in terms of both student perceptions and student performance, as measured by grade distribution. The survey groups for this study consist of 94 students from the traditional classes and 37 students from the online classes. A breakdown of groups by gender, age and employment status, as shown in Tables 1-3, reveals that of the three factors, the biggest difference between the two groups during the 1999-2000 academic year was in employment status. Table 1 Average Age Traditional Class 23 Online Class 27 Table 2 Male Female Traditional Class 36% 64% Online Class 39% 61% Table 3 Employment Status Full-time Part-time Unemployed Traditional Class 33% 60% 7% Online Class 56% 28% 16% Background Since it was first offered in summer quarter 1998, approximately 200 students have completed The Division of Business Administration's online Fundamentals of Computer Applications course (CISM 2201) at Macon State College. The course includes basic computer concepts and terminology, as well as instruction using Microsoft Office application software. Enrollment in the online course requires students to have a 2.5 grade point average, Internet access, and a computer with MS Office software. Online students attend an initial class meeting or orientation session during which they meet the instructor and each other and have the opportunity to ask questions. They are also told about hardware and software requirements, informed of course expectations and the importance of being self-directed, and are provided software training to become familiar with the online course materials and operational mechanics. In addition, they receive information typically provided on the first day of traditional classes, such as a syllabus, overview of the textbook, instructor office hours, testing procedures, etc. In the traditional classes, students are informed during their first session that online classes are available should they qualify and prefer that instructional format. Course Evaluations In an effort to assess student perceptions of CISM 2201 instruction, as well as increase course effectiveness and student learning, students are asked to evaluate their class experience. At the end of each semester during the 1999-2000 academic year, on-campus surveys were administered in class and the online surveys were administered via e-mail. As on the traditional class evaluation form, online students are asked to evaluate the course contents, availability of the instructor, their understanding of the class organization and the grading process. Unlike the traditional form, however, the online evaluation form also asks students to compare the quality of learning in an online class versus that in the traditional class, as well as their reasons for taking the online course. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,006
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,020

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0020,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0060,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,085
Tête enseignante GPT0,395
Écart entre enseignants0,309 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations101
Publié2001
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueTHE journalMême sujetOnline and Blended LearningTravaux en français237 207