MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037787335 · doi:10.3138/jvme.0813-112r1

Canine Theriogenology for Dog Enthusiasts: Teaching Methodology and Outcomes in a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC)

2014· article· en· W2037787335 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Margaret V. Root Kustritz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Medical Education · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Practises and Engagement
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersScience and Engineering Research Board
KeywordsMassive open online courseGrading (engineering)Medical educationGeneral partnershipTheriogenologyOnline courseCommitDiscussion boardPsychologyAudience responseCourse evaluationMedicineHigher educationMathematics educationMultimediaEngineeringComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A massive open online course (MOOC) in canine theriogenology was offered for dog owners and breeders and for veterinary professionals as a partnership between the University of Minnesota and Coursera. The six-week course was composed of short video lectures, multiple-choice quizzes with instant feedback to assess understanding, weekly case studies with peer evaluation to promote integration of course materials, and discussion forums to promote participant interaction. Peak enrollment was 8,796 students. The grading policy for completion was strict and was upheld; completion rate for all participants was 7.5%. About 12% of participants achieved a grade of over 90% in the course, with those who had any deficiency mostly missing one quiz or assignment. Ninety-nine individuals were enrolled in a for-cost, credentialed pathway, and 50% of those individuals completed all required course components. Pre- and postcourse surveys were used to demonstrate that learning objectives were met by the participants and to identify that lack of time to commit to study was the biggest impediment to completion. Positive aspects of the course were active engagement by participants from all over the world and the ability of this university and instructor to reach those learners. Negative aspects concerned technical support and negative feedback from some participants who were unable to meet course requirements for reasons beyond the control of the instructor.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.827
Threshold uncertainty score0.713

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.220
GPT teacher head0.533
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations21
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Veterinary Medical EducationSame topicHigher Education Practises and EngagementFrench-language works237,207