MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1727023698 · doi:10.3406/stice.2007.952

La recherche sur les forums de discussion en milieu éducatif : critères de qualité et qualité des pratiques

2007· article· en· W1727023698 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

VenueSciences et Technologies de l Information et de la Communication pour l Éducation et la Formation · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversité TÉLUQ
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Diversity (politics)Interpretation (philosophy)Perspective (graphical)SociologyDisciplineLibrary scienceEpistemologyPsychologySocial scienceComputer sciencePhilosophyLinguisticsGeographyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From a methodological and theoretical perspective, this article analyses the problematic of research on computer conferencing in an educational context from three characteristics aspects : the diversity of disciplinary approaches, the complexity of the object under study, and the uncertain appropriateness of the criteria used to judge the scientific quality of researches. From this problematic, an interpretation framework is developed allowing for the differentiation of researches and their evaluation based on appropriate criteria.

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)0.121
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1210.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.005
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.289
GPT teacher head0.538
Teacher spread0.249 · 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