Online learning: The potential for occupational therapy education
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Online learning continues to have a significant impact on higher education. Increasingly students seek a combination of online learning and face-to-face instruction at undergraduate and graduate levels and occupational therapists ask for online continuing professional development opportunities. However, occupational therapy educators have been slow to adopt web-based instructional technology. This paper presents background information on the use of web-based learning in the general sphere of higher education and outlines the current range of usage in occupational therapy education. Research findings are presented to stimulate discussion regarding online learning and occupational therapy professional socialisation, student satisfaction and outcomes. There is a fine line between full and partial online course delivery, so research on technology-enhanced campus-based delivery is also included in the review. Evidence suggests that blending combinations of technologies with computer mediated learning enhances interaction and could address the higher order learning needs of professional programmes such as occupational therapy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it