MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1602586658

Tackling the Issues and Challenges of Using Video Data in Adult Literacy Research.

2007· article· en· W1602586658 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ali R. Abasi, Maurice Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Adult Learning · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Systems and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRigourLiteracyData collectionAdult literacyAdult educationField (mathematics)PublishingNarrativePedagogyPsychologySociologySocial sciencePolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although video has long been used as a teaching aid in adult literacy and basic education, literacy researchers seem to have ignored the potential benefits of using video as a tool that could add rigour to research. Reporting on their field experiences of an adult literacy learning study in Canada, the authors provide a narrative account of their use of video as a data collection tool. The article describes the methodological challenges associated with the use of video data and the procedures that were used to analyse video records in their adult literacy research.

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)0.356
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.646
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score0.794

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3560.646
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0120.019
Science and technology studies0.0100.016
Scholarly communication0.0170.018
Open science0.0050.010
Research integrity0.0070.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.505
Teacher spread0.262 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
DomainMethods
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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal of Adult LearningSame topicEducation Systems and PolicyFrench-language works237,207