MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1799640153 · doi:10.5121/ijcsit.2015.7303

Instructor Perspectives of Mobile Learning Platform: An Empirical Study

2015· article· en· W1799640153 on OpenAlexaff
Muasaad Alrasheedi, Luiz Fernando Capretz, Arif Raza

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Computer Science and Information Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Learning in Education
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaceAutonomyCompetence (human resources)Computer scienceMultimediaEmpirical researchMobile technologyMathematics educationMobile devicePsychologyWorld Wide WebMathematicsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mobile learning (m-Learning) is the cutting-edge learning platform to really gain traction, driven mostly by the huge uptake in smartphones and their ever-increasing uses within the educational society. Education has long benefitted from the proliferation of technology; however, m-Learning adoption has not proceeded at the pace one might expect. There is a disconnect between the rate of adoption of the underlying platform (smartphones) and the use of that technology within learning. The reasons behind this have been the subject of several research studies. However, previous studies have mostly focused on investigating the critical success factors (CSFs) from the student perspectives. In this research, we have carried out an extensive study of the six factors that impact the success of m-Learning from instructors' perspectives. The results of the research showed that three factors -technical competence of instructors, Instructors' autonomy, and blended learning -are the most important elements that contribute to m-Learning adoption from instructors' perspectives.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score0.650

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.009
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Computer Science and Information TechnologySame topicMobile Learning in EducationFrench-language works237,207