MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Effectiveness of a Lifecycle Approach to Learning Project Management

2013· article· en· W2049117125 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mehryar Nooriafshar

Bibliographic record

VenueThe European Journal of Social & Behavioural Sciences · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTest (biology)Project managementProcess (computing)Application lifecycle managementThe InternetEngineering managementLearning ManagementKnowledge managementMultimediaEngineeringWorld Wide WebSystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is based on an ongoing research project. Its main purpose is to demonstrate the effectiveness of adopting the project lifecycle approach to learning Project Management through an interactive multimedia system. This multimedia system, referred to as the interactive tool (or the tool) in the paper, is a flash based environment. It can be accessed from either the local storage device of a computer or the Internet under both Microsoft and Apple based operating systems. The tool follows the standard lifecycle phases of a project in teaching fundamentals of Project Management at the undergraduate level. In order to demonstrate its learning effectiveness, the tool was put to the test at three different universities in Australia, Japan and Canada. All the participants were taking Project Management as part of their studies. This combination provided the opportunity of studying participants from different learning, linguistic and cultural backgrounds. The test consisted of a specially designed workshop with customisations for each country. The main objective was to measure and gauge the learning outcome in each case. The findings confirmed that all the participants from every group achieved two main goals of learning the field; and enjoying the learning process.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.797
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.286 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe European Journal of Social & Behavioural SciencesSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207