MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026598078 · doi:10.5539/ass.v4n3p26

Online Quizzes for Operations Research – A Case Study

2009· article· en· W2026598078 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sigurbjorg Gudlaugsdottir, Frances Griffin

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovations in Educational Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMacquarie University
KeywordsTask (project management)Class (philosophy)Quality (philosophy)Mathematics educationPsychologyComputer scienceMedical educationMultimediaMedicineArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A student's success in mathematically-based disciplines is directly related to the quantity and quality of the tasks provided, and to the feedback given on their efforts. With a class of several hundred students it is often impossible to provide enough assessable work, and to give detailed and timely feedback. In response, the Department of Statistics at Macquarie University has implemented online randomised quizzes. Students must pass each quiz with at most two errors, but the number of attempts is unlimited. Consequently, an assessment task becomes a learning tool, requiring students to practice techniques until mastered. Feedback is immediate.At the end of Semester 2 in 2007, students completed a survey about their response to the quizzes. The results indicated that over 81% of participants liked the quick feedback and, furthermore, over 70% of survey participants believed the quizzes helped them to understand the concepts being taught.

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)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.281
GPT teacher head0.626
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicInnovations in Educational MethodsFrench-language works237,207