MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975823911 · doi:10.1108/07378830210452631

Access to online learning: the role of the courseware authoring tool developer

2002· article· en· W1975823911 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

VenueLibrary Hi Tech · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Accessibility for Disabilities
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceUploadWorld Wide WebMultimediaWeb Accessibility InitiativeOrder (exchange)Web applicationWeb standardsWeb developmentWeb pageWeb application security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Implementation of recommended design strategies can potentially allow any Web‐based learning program to be made accessible to learners who use adaptive technologies. However, one of the greatest barriers to achieving this goal is the lack of authoring tools that support course content developers in adhering to existing accessibility guidelines. In order to ensure universal access, attention must be given to Web pages generated automatically by courseware programs, as well as those uploaded from an external source. Courseware authoring environments could easily include utilities to support developers in making their online resources accessible. This paper will review products recently available on the market using the guidelines published by the World Wide Web Consortium’s Web Accessibility Initiative as a framework for analysis.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.785
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.299
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