MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1919210172 · doi:10.56059/jl4d.v1i1.12

Bridging Fields at a Critical Time

2013· article· en· W1919210172 on OpenAlexaff
Jon Baggaley

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Learning for Development · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridging (networking)Massive open online courseDeveloping countryPolitical scienceEngineering ethicsPublic relationsComputer scienceSociologyEconomic growthPedagogyEngineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Journal of Learning for Development is launched at a critical time in the evolution of technology-based education. Currently, the ‘massive open online course’ is being welcomed as a cost-saver by educators in developed and emerging nations alike. Evaluation studies of MOOC impact, however, do not as yet confirm that courses with massive student numbers and no teachers are universally viable; and MOOC courses and evaluations have not taken developing-country needs into account. The new Journal, with its emphasis on the educational needs of developing as well as developed regions, can help to advise innovations of this type.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.276
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; 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Learning for DevelopmentSame topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207