MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067883665 · doi:10.5539/cis.v2n4p122

The Use of ICT in Public and Private Institutions of Higher Learning, Malaysia

2009· article· en· W2067883665 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer and Information Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation and Communications TechnologyUSableComputer scienceFocus (optics)Knowledge managementMathematics educationMultimediaPsychologyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the extent of ICT utilization among the members of Faculty A of four public higher learning institutions (IPTA) and seven private higher learning institutions (IPTS) in Northern Malaysia. Its focus is on a) to investigate the extent of ICT resources provided by universities authorities, b) focus on types and extent of ICT usage in daily activities, c) to explore the ICT proficiencies level and d) to investigate the level of ICT integration in teaching activities. A total of 76 responses out of 77 from IPTA and only 105 out of 108 responses of IPTS are usable for further analysis in this study. Findings indicate that in the IPTA, though the facilities provided are not as plenty as in IPTS, the level of usage is quite encouraging. While in the IPTS, the levels of ICT usage among the educators are still not satisfactorily. Results also indicated that usage frequencies are more prone on informative in nature, besides integrating computer technology. Furthermore, the study also indicates that there were considerable differences in the use of ICT by educators in their perceived proficiencies and integrating computer technology. This study could be improved by expanding the total sampling population to all faculties in both universities. Methods of analysis could also be varied beyond the descriptive analysis done. Factors that could hinder the level of ICT usage by the educators could also be studied.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.677
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.320
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