MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Lessons Learned in Developing and Delivering Web-Based Graduate Courses: A Faculty Perspective

2002· article· en· W133148340 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sonia Udod, W. Dean Care

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Nurse educatorMedical educationDeveloping countryGraduate studentsNurse educationMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increased demand for graduate distance education by RNs create many challenges for nurse educators. This article describes the trials and tribulations of developing and delivering two Web-based graduate nursing courses at a western Canadian university. The authors describe the background and rationale for developing Web-based courses, the relevant literature, and the lessons learned in planning and delivering these courses.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0110.007
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations16
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Continuing Education in NursingSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207