Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent studies in the literature on online learning highlight a constructivist approach to knowledge-building in Web-based environments. In this case study of an online course, students were introduced to a constructivist orientation toward learning, a requirement to work in a new learning environment, and a challenge to accomplish academic work with groups of colleagues. Students learned successfully how to accommodate these requirements. In particular, this article tells how communication strategies, collaboration with one another, interaction throughout the course, and consistent participation in the growing online database supported students’ perceptions of self-efficacy and their emerging commitment to a constructivist approach to learning. Des etudes recentes, issues de la litterature sur l’apprentissage en ligne, mettent en relief une approche constructiviste de la construction de connaissances dans des environnements utilisant la technologie Web. Dans cette etude de cas portant sur un cours en ligne, les etudiants ont ete exposes a une orientation constructiviste de l’apprentissage, ils ont du travailler dans un nouvel environnement d’apprentissage et ils ont ete mis au defi de travailler avec des groupes de collegues. Les etudiants ont appris avec succes comment s’adapter a ces conditions. L’article decrit comment les strategies de communication, la collaboration, l’interaction continue et la participation a l’alimentation de la base de donnees en ligne ont contribue a donner aux etudiants un sentiment d’autoefficience et ont cause l’emergence d’un sentiment d’engagement envers une approche constructiviste de l’apprentissage.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".