MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121399560 · doi:10.1080/10494820701331558

The validation and brokering of competence: Issues of trust and technology

2007· article· en· W2121399560 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Griff Richards, Peter Donkers, Marek Hatala, Aude Dufresne

Bibliographic record

VenueInteractive Learning Environments · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCompetency Development and Evaluation
Canadian institutionsSydney Steel (Canada)Université de MontréalSimon Fraser UniversityBritish Columbia Institute of Technology
FundersSimon Fraser UniversityAthabasca University
KeywordsCompetence (human resources)PsychologyTechnology integrationKnowledge managementComputer scienceEducational technologyData scienceMathematics educationSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Campus Canada promotes lifelong learning through the articulation of workplace and other experiential learning for academic credit. This paper describes the recent re-development of the Record of Learning (RoL) component of the Campus Canada's e-Portfolio System. In matching the academic members' desires for provision of secure e-transcripts with learners' desires for validation of educational assertions, the RoL provides decentralized secure service without creating clerical log jams. The new RoL system paves the way for web services interoperability between registrar services and for automated creation of secure Records of Learning by workplace trainers. Further development is foreseen to establish the RoL as a separate service interoperable with a variety of e-portfolio and credentialing agencies.

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)0.070
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.170
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.370

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0700.170
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.041
Scholarly communication0.0260.031
Open science0.0020.017
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInteractive Learning EnvironmentsSame topicCompetency Development and EvaluationFrench-language works237,207