MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1519105119 · doi:10.56105/cjsae.v19i1.1823

Assessing Adult Learning: A Guide for Practitioners. Joseph J. Moran. (2001). Krieger Publishing Company, Malabar, Florida, 187 pages.

2005· article· en· W1519105119 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Cynthia Lee Andruske

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Learning Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublishingSociologyManagementLibrary scienceMedia studiesArtComputer scienceEconomicsLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At first glance, individuals teaching in the field of adult education would pick up Joseph Moran's book, Assessing Adult Learning: A Guide for Practitioners, with great interest.Many literacy practitioners, community instructors, or other educators teaching adults are always seeking ways to assess students and to teach them how to enhance their own learning while still promoting the principles of adult education.Therefore, when adult educators examine the table of contents and read "Understanding the Basic Principles of Informal Assessment," they think: "Finally, oh, good!" Moran promises that informal assessment activities will assist both educators and learners to become involved in the evaluation process.Moreover, he maintains that when educators do this, their students will become more interested and empowered in their learning through the feedback they receive on evaluation.In this second edition, Moran stresses that focusing on practical techniques of assessment is essential.He emphasizes the importance of using a planning grid, similar to that of Angelo and Cross to schedule student assessments.According to Moran, this helps educators integrate learning activities, behaviors, and progress, in relation to thinking, academic and discipline specific knowledge skills, liberal arts values, work preparation, and personal development.Moreover, the grid charts students' progress in learning over time.Furthermore, Moran provides some practical ways to evaluate students through more traditional means, such as test taking while "requiring] learners to display what they know about the task" (p.94) because "the more a learner is assessed for completing a 'real-life' task the more likely it will be considered a performance assessment" (p.95).In addition to discussing how to design traditional tests and performance assessments, Moran highlights how educators may use and assess portfolios to illustrate learners' skills and goal achievements.Before ending the book, Moran explains how to apply assessment holistically to adult basic education, GED, workplace, community education, higher education, continuing professional education, and self-directed learning.Moran concludes this

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.015

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.335 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal for the Study of Adult EducationSame topicHigher Education Learning PracticesFrench-language works237,207