MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997526924 · doi:10.1145/2567574.2576773

Learning analytics for the social media age

2014· article· en· W1997526924 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Anatoliy Gruzd, Caroline Haythornthwaite, Drew Paulin, Rafa Absar, Michael Huggett

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaDalhousie University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaAthabasca University
KeywordsAffordanceSocial mediaLearning analyticsSocial media analyticsComputer scienceSocial learningAnalyticsData scienceWorld Wide WebInternet privacyKnowledge managementHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In just a short period of time, social media have altered many aspects of our daily lives, from how we form and maintain social relationships to how we discover, access and share information online. Now social media are also beginning to affect how we teach and learn in this increasingly interconnected and information-rich world. The panelists will discuss their ongoing work that seeks to understand the affordances and potential roles of social media in learning, as well as to determine and provide methods that can help researchers and educators evaluate the use of social media for teaching and learning based on automated analyses of social media texts and networks. The panel will focus on the first phase of this five-year research initiative "Learning Analytics for the Social Media Age" funded by the Social Science and Humanites Research Council of Canada (2013--2018).

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0110.022
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.293
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations16
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207