MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132438674 · doi:10.5539/ass.v8n3p317

An Assessment of the Extent of Integration, Application and Utilization of Web-Based Learning Systems in Post Basic Institutions in Nigeria

2012· article· en· W2132438674 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Olaniyi Alaba Sofowora

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlackboard (design pattern)Distance educationSample (material)Medical educationPsychologyComputer scienceEngineering managementMathematics educationEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study employed descriptive survey design. It discussed the adoption of, and integration of Web-Based Learning Systems(WBLS) into teaching and learning for distance learning and full time students. It also discussed various concerted efforts at integrating web-based learning into the teaching and learning of Science and Technology Education at the Post-Basic Institutions (STEP-B). The specific objectives of this study are to:(i) investigate WBLS adoption and usage among the students of Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife for both distance and residential learning,(ii) determine the availability and adequacy of the facilities / infrastructures for WBLS,(iii) assess the level of implementation of WBLS (iv) determine the WBL format adopted by the University,(v) find out student’s acceptance to use the type of WBL format adopted, and (vi)investigate the challenges facing the integration and utilization of WBLS .The study sample consisted of two hundred and fifty undergraduate students and fifty six staff selected from OAU Ife. The research instrument is made of 35items divided into 5 sections. The results showed that adoption and usage of WBLS in OAU Ife was very high. WBLS facilities and infrastructure are inadequate for both full time and distance learners. The students were enthusiastic to accept and use the new WBLS (Academic Blackboard and Multi-site teaching using the blended learning approach). The major challenges as ranked by the students are: techno-phobia, band width problem, epileptic power supply and insufficient infrastructure.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.355 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207