MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968181475 · doi:10.1300/j136v11n04_11

Faculty Begin to Replace Textbooks with “Freely” Accessible Online Resources

2007· article· en· W1968181475 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

VenueInternet Reference Services Quarterly · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOpen Education and E-Learning
Canadian institutionsSeneca Polytechnic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVariety (cybernetics)Plan (archaeology)Point (geometry)Computer scienceMathematics educationWorld Wide WebMultimediaPsychologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT More and more students are financially unable to acquire, or deliberately choose to go without course textbooks. A variety of commercial and noncommercial initiatives have materialized to address the student success challenge of learning material access inequality in the classroom. There is a gap between how higher education faculty plan to teach a course and the actual learning environment that exists in practice. Faculty are beginning to experiment with freely available and licensed library materials as a substitute for commercial textbooks and course packages to address the failure of textbook publishers to reach a price point that entices students to buy textbooks. The results thus far are promising. Some courses can be delivered today using only “freely available” learning resources, some using a mix of fee based and free, while others cannot be delivered using any freely available resources at all due to a lack of availability.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score0.923

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.281 · 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