MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1579275098 · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v11i1.834

Blended online learning design: Shaken not stirred

2010· article· en· W1579275098 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Norm Vaughn, Michael Power

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMainstreamBlended learningHigher educationDistance educationOnline learningSession (web analytics)Educational technologyGraduate studentsSociologyLearning societyMathematics educationPedagogyComputer sciencePublic relationsPsychologyPolitical scienceMultimediaWorld Wide WebLifelong learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given the crucial role played by universities in a knowledge-based society, understanding how and under what conditions online learning (OL) can improve access to graduate studies is of the highest importance to today’s growing global economy. Over the past decade, phenomenal advances have been made in the application of communication and information technologies to support student learning in higher education. Yet, in proportion to overall provision of higher education, the use of technology by faculty for graduate-level, online learning (OL) has been minimal, especially among regular faculty. In this session, Norm Vaughan and Michael Power present an adapted form of OL, especially designed for traditional universities, with initial data from studies underway in two Canadian universities. Finally, an emerging network of researchers interested in the role of online learning within mainstream higher education is presented.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.353 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning→Same topicOnline and Blended Learning→French-language works237,207→