MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1513762315

The Design, Assessment, And Implementation of a Web-Based Course

2004· article· en· W1513762315 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Leon L. Combs

Bibliographic record

VenueAACE journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLearning Styles and Cognitive Differences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCourse (navigation)Instructional designCourse evaluationComputer sciencePresentation (obstetrics)Learning designLearning stylesEducational technologyWeb designMultimediaMathematics educationWorld Wide WebThe InternetHigher educationEngineeringPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The design of a web-based course is discussed based upon considerations of content, pedagogy, learning styles, and assessment. The learning styles are examined as primary considerations and indeed dictate needed elements in a webbased course. Assessment is also considered in the initial planning of such a course. These design elements are discussed with particular web elements given for each design element. Further illustration of the design procedure can be seen by going to a freshman chemistry course referenced at the end of this article. All considerations discussed in this article may be used both for a web-enhanced course and a course taught totally online. This discussion was presented at EdMedia00 in Montreal, Canada. To design a course for optimum impact, the following should be simultaneously considered: the course material; the students’ learning styles; pedagogy, which includes methodologies of presentation; and assessment. These items then need to be considered as itemized.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.385 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAACE journalSame topicLearning Styles and Cognitive DifferencesFrench-language works237,207