MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1556851285

Pondering Change and the Relationship of Prior Learning Assessment to MOOCs and Knowledge in Higher Education

2013· article· en· W1556851285 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePLA Inside Out: An International Journal on Theory, Research and Practice in Prior Learning Assessment · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Learning Practices
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatus quoHigher educationPhenomenonAccreditationPedagogyPolitical sciencePsychologyEngineering ethicsMedical educationEpistemologyEngineeringMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses the role of assessment as a learning activity in prior learning assessment (PLA) and the potential offered by PLA for assessing MOOC learning toward academic credentials offered by accredited institutions of higher learning. In doing so, the paper also considers the nature of knowledge and provides a short history of the MOOC movement and an overview of MOOC issues currently under discussion in the field. The paper suggests that, at the end of the day, a major contribution of this intensely controversial phenomenon is the investigative light it casts on traditional practices of higher education and our historical acceptance of the educational status quo.

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.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Scholarly communication, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.448
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.243
GPT teacher head0.544
Teacher spread0.301 · 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