MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Teaching and Learning Using Evidence-Based Principles

2012· book-chapter· en· W1482724984 on OpenAlexaff
Jodi S. Goodman, James OʼBrien

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Marketing Education
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceInstructional designCognitionMathematics educationLearning theoryPsychologyKnowledge managementCognitive scienceNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this chapter, we present several cognitive learning theories relevant for novice, expert, and advanced learning, and we discuss their implications for the instructional design and delivery of university management courses. We describe how evidence-based instructional strategies can be derived from cognitive learning theories, and then we apply the strategies to commonly used teaching practices in management courses. We also address a number of challenges that we believe have impeded evidence-based teaching practice.

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)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.153

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.008
Scholarly communication0.0110.008
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.155 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations24
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicManagement and Marketing EducationFrench-language works237,207