MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102349715 · doi:10.1108/00907320410569725

Evolving instruction in biology: using the web to improve in‐class instruction

2004· article· en· W2102349715 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueReference Services Review · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLibrary instructionInformation literacyClass (philosophy)Computer scienceWorld Wide WebStrengths and weaknessesWeb applicationMathematics educationFace (sociological concept)MultimediaPsychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Much debate in the library literature has focused on the effectiveness of web‐based or online instruction versus traditional face‐to‐face library instruction. While both forms of library instruction have their strengths and weaknesses, the authors contend that a hybrid approach to information literacy instruction, by bringing the web into the classroom, offers students and instructors the greatest benefit. The authors' experience with the evolution of instruction sessions for 1,100 first‐year biology students from PowerPoint presentations to web‐based courseware (WebCT) to its current web‐based format illustrates the improvements to instruction that have accrued as the program has developed. These include the ability to address diverse learning styles, encourage active participation, provide 24/7 access, and foster increased student contact with librarians.

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 score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.006
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.312 · 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