MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997936751 · doi:10.1177/0885412202239139

Distance Education: a Bibliographic Review for Educational Planners and Policymakers 1992-2002

2003· review· en· W1997936751 on OpenAlexfundno aff
John S. Bishop, Deborah F. Spake

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Planning Literature · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsDistance educationQuality (philosophy)Higher educationEconomics educationSociologyPublic relationsPolitical scienceMathematics educationEconomic growthPsychologyPedagogyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Distance education is a growing area of interest in the academic literature. An explosion of articles has appeared in recent years documenting this trend at postsecondary institutions. The topics addressed in the literature include the demand for distance education, its acceptance by students and instructors, the quality of distance learning, the methods of delivery, the economic impact of providing distance education, and the technological requirements necessary for the delivery of online courses. This bibliography focuses on the academic literature of the last decade and provides an overview for planners and policymakers in their attempt to develop quality distance education programs.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.391
Threshold uncertainty score0.891

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.394 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations24
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Planning LiteratureSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207