MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105277306 · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v1n2p150

A Study of End-Users’ Attitudes towards Digital Media Approach: the Experience of a Public University in Uganda

2012· article· en· W2105277306 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Stephen Ndawula, Ngobi David Henry, Namugenyi Deborah, Nakawuki Rose Coaster

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Higher Education · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender and Technology in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigital mediaUploadTest (biology)Information and Communications TechnologyElectronic mediaInformation technologyMedical educationPsychologyPublic relationsMultimediaComputer sciencePolitical scienceWorld Wide WebMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

University students in Uganda had been confined to use of traditional educational technologies such as chalkboards, papers and text books. Digital Media Approach recently found its way in the academia at public universities in Uganda. Information and communication technology (ICT) have become popular means of surfing, downloading and obtaining electronic materials among students. The approach has globally facilitated the seeking of academic information at institutions of higher learning in Uganda. However, little research has been conducted in regard to students who are the key users of Digital Media. The purpose of this study was to explore students’ attitudes towards Digital Media Approach at a public university in Uganda. The study specifically sought to establish whether university students’ attitudes towards digital technology were dependent on computer ownership, field of study and previous computer hands-on experience. A survey research was employed to establish students’ attitudes in regard to digital media. Questionnaires and interviews were used as tools for data collection while data was analyzed using a t-test. The findings showed that students who had their own computers as well as previous computer hands-on experience had more positive attitudes towards using the media than their counterparts without previous computer hands-on experience.

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 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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.153

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Higher EducationSame topicGender and Technology in EducationFrench-language works237,207