MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1510878069 · doi:10.15353/joci.v11i1.2856

Constructing Sustainable Digital Learning Environments for Remote Rural Children of Sarawak

2015· article· en· W1510878069 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Norazila Abd Aziz, Mohamad Fitri S, Rethinasamy Soubakeavathi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Community Informatics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicICT in Developing Communities
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigital divideInformation and Communications TechnologyLiteracyEthnic groupRural areaGeographyKey (lock)MultimediaComputer sciencePedagogyWorld Wide WebSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Children today are labeled as Digital Natives, because they are born into an era where ICT has already permeated almost all layers of societies around the world. However, digital gaps among children still exist, particularly for those born into underprivileged remote rural communities. Making technology accessible for all learners, irrespective of their geographical locations, is often viewed as the means for narrowing, if not eliminating digital divide. Presence of technology would definitely generate interest and discussion about its potential use especially among learners from rural remote locations. However, the debate is still open about the feasibility and capability of technology to initiate meaningful learning. This paper describes part of an on-going research to investigate the impact of using technology to supplement classroom learning among children of remote rural locations in Sarawak, Malaysia. One of the key goals of the project is to develop a technology literacy programme in an informal learning setting using localized content which are selected and built to sustain and enhance local cultures, beliefs and traditions that already exist in these remote rural locations. This project also investigates the factors that need to be addressed when planning, designing and sustaining informal learning experiences using technology for children of various ethnic groups, languages, beliefs and cultures.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.274
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Community InformaticsSame topicICT in Developing CommunitiesFrench-language works237,207