MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042942372 · doi:10.1080/01587919.2012.667963

Thesis and antithesis

2012· article· en· W2042942372 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

VenueDistance Education · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCognitive Science and Education Research
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConnectivismViewpointsAntithesisEpistemologySociologyAsynchronous communicationPhilosophy of educationPoint (geometry)PsychologyPedagogyHigher educationLearning theoryComputer sciencePolitical scienceLawPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Behind every educational concept an opposing notion is waiting for recognition. Despite their avowed objectives, however, academic debates do not always encourage the discussion of opposing views. A review of sessions at the December 2011 Online Educa Conference illustrates that point and others about academic meetings. Opposing viewpoints may be valid in specific situations and eras, however, and dynamic shifts between opposing views can be justified. For example, the recently argued notion of connectivism, while amply predated in the educational literature, has been timely in indicating the current need for reassessment of asynchronous educational methods. Meanwhile its logical nemesis, disconnectivism, awaits a timely moment to be proposed. The article suggests that these two polar opposites could justify one another as a psychological continuum of learning activity, while distinguishing connectivism from the earlier cybernetic theories of Gordon Pask

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.401
Threshold uncertainty score0.251

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.304 · 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