MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046102620 · doi:10.5210/fm.v11i3.1317

Landscape without bearings: Instructors' first experiences in Web-based synchronous environments

2006· article· en· W2046102620 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elizabeth Murphy, Justyna Ciszewska-Carr

Bibliographic record

VenueFirst Monday · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsynchronous communicationAffordanceProcess (computing)Computer scienceFocus (optics)Face (sociological concept)Asynchronous learningWeb applicationHuman–computer interactionWorld Wide WebSynchronous learningTeaching methodMathematics educationPsychologySociologyCooperative learningTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the accounts of eight instructors’ metaphorical travels in landscapes without bearings. The instructors were part of a pilot project at a Canadian university involving the integration of a synchronous communication and collaboration environment into asynchronous distance education courses. To establish their bearings, the instructors need to be aware of their goals and combine them with strategies and techniques that effectively manage the affordances and constraints of the environment. That process may require a degree of risk–taking combined with a willingness to help students lead themselves. It requires developing a proficiency in the simultaneous use of multiple tools and recognizing the differences and similarities between Web–based synchronous environments and face–to–face or asynchronous environments. Above all, it requires an interest in and focus on pedagogy.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.280
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 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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFirst MondaySame topicInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207