MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059567823 · doi:10.1108/09513541011020936

Harnessing ICT potential

2010· article· en· W2059567823 on OpenAlexaff
Shane Dawson, Liz Heathcote, Gary Poole

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Educational Management · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Governance and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigher educationLearning analyticsOriginalityLearning ManagementAnalyticsAccountabilityGraduation (instrument)InstitutionKnowledge managementInformation and Communications TechnologyComputer sciencePublic relationsMedical educationPsychologyMathematics educationSociologyData scienceEngineeringWorld Wide WebQualitative researchPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This paper aims to examine how effective higher education institutions have been in harnessing the data capture mechanisms from their student information systems, learning management systems and communication tools for improving the student learning experience and informing practitioners of the achievement of specific learning outcomes. The paper seeks to argue that the future of analytics in higher education lies in the development of more comprehensive and integrated systems to value add to the student learning experience. Design/methodology/approach Literature regarding the trend for greater accountability in higher education is reviewed in terms of its implications for greater “user driven” direction. In addition, IT usage within higher education and contemporary usage of data captured from various higher education systems is examined and compared to common commercial applications to suggest how higher education management and teachers can gain greater understanding of the student cohort and personalise and enhance the learning experience much as commercial entities have done for their client base. A way forward for higher education is proposed. Findings If the multiple means that students engage with university systems are considered, it is possible to track individual activity throughout the entire student life cycle – from initial admission, through course progression and finally graduation and employment transitions. The combined data captured by various systems builds a detailed picture of the activities students, instructors, service areas and the institution as a whole undertake and can be used to improve relevance, efficiency and effectiveness in a higher education institution. Originality/value The paper outlines how academic analytics can be used to better inform institutions about their students learning support needs. The paper provides examples of IT automation that may allow for student user‐information to be translated into a personalised and semi‐automated support system for students.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0170.014
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.010

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Citations81
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Educational ManagementSame topicHigher Education Governance and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207