MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1655426268 · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v5i3.207

Use of Distance Education by Religions of the World to Train, Edify, and Educate Adherents

2004· article· en· W1655426268 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
P. Clint Rogers, Scott L. Howell

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedia, Religion, Digital Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistance educationReligious educationHinduismBuddhismSociologyPoliticsIslamJudaismReligious studiesTheologyPedagogyPolitical scienceLawPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Islamic, Hindu, Buddhist, Baha'i, Jewish, and Christian organizations are all experimenting with distance education for various reasons and to different extents, due to religious, economic, and political factors. Religious institutions worldwide are not only turning to the World Wide Web (WWW) to place information concerning religious beliefs and provide virtual services for their constituents but are also getting more involved in formally educating their members at a distance. This paper will document some of these educational efforts and the reasons behind the expanding use of distance education by several of the major religious institutions for training, edifying, and educating their religious adherents. Keywords: distance education; distance learning; religion; religious education and training; religious institutions; theology

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations18
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed LearningSame topicMedia, Religion, Digital CommunicationFrench-language works237,207