MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1785945188

MOOC Learning Experience Design: Issues and Challenges

2015· article· en· W1785945188 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Hélène Fournier, Rita Kop

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsYorkville UniversityNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLearning designEngineering ethicsPsychologyEngineeringMathematics education
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper will present current work on various frameworks that are aimed at guiding the research, development, and evaluation efforts around Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). Initiatives and activities, including current work by the National Research Council (NRC) in the context of Learning and Performance Support Systems and MOOCs, will be presented along with outstanding challenges and issues to be addressed in the near future. Findings from case studies of Personal Learning Environments (PLEs) and MOOCs will be presented which suggest that learning experiences are impacted by much more than tools and technologies. There is the potential for an enormous palette of possibilities for creating effective, meaningful, and successful learning experiences, as well as many important issues and challenges to address. Recommendations coming of out of recent cMOOC surveys and forums will highlight participant focused and learner driven processes along with a changing notion of time and space in online learning environments. The paper also unveils current and future areas of research and development in a new Learning and Performance Support System (LPSS) program at NRC, including learning analytics, big data, and educational data mining, as well as ethics and privacy issues in networked environments and the use of personal learning data to feed into the research and development process.

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)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.083
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.205

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.083
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0190.009
Open science0.0060.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations34
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207