MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055687413 · doi:10.1108/09696470510599136

Building a sustainable e‐learning development culture

2005· article· en· W2055687413 on OpenAlexaff
Tracey L. Leacock

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Learning Organization · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOrganizational Learning and Leadership
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOriginalityOrganizational cultureOpenness to experienceWorkflowKnowledge managementValue (mathematics)Quality (philosophy)Learning organizationSet (abstract data type)Computer scienceSociologyPsychologyPublic relationsCreativityPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide details on Simon Fraser University's new School of Interactive Arts and Technology (SIAT) approach to creating a culture that supports rapid development of high‐quality e‐learning materials, why it has been successful, and what has been learned. Design/methodology/approach Describes how, over a period of four years SIAT has had the unique opportunity to build an integrated set of graduate and undergraduate degree programs from the ground up. The organization has recognized the importance of its people – both in terms of the knowledge they bring to the organization, and the added value it gains by providing an environment where all employees can continue to learn – from courses, from their own experience, and from each other. Findings Because of the organization's structured, yet flexible, approach to course design and development workflow, each set of courses was ready just as the students became ready to take them. The organizational culture's combination of clear structure, openness to new ideas, and commitment to high quality courseware has enabled us to meet the needs of our students and prepare them for careers in today's high‐tech workforce. Originality/value SIAT have developed best practices for the implementation of organizational e‐learning strategies and the approach will be useful in informing the strategies adopted by other organizations.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.008
Scholarly communication0.0130.007
Open science0.0020.016
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations22
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Learning OrganizationSame topicOrganizational Learning and LeadershipFrench-language works237,207