Meeting the Challenge of Developing Courses for Distance Delivery: Two Different Models for Course Development
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
Nursing education is increasingly challenged to convert traditional course offerings to distance delivery modalities to accommodate practicing RNs who wish to pursue continuing education. There is a lack of understanding regarding the experiences of faculty and staff from other departments within the university in the development of distance education courses. The purpose of this descriptive study was to uncover the experiences of nursing faculty and members of a university support unit involved in interdisciplinary development of distance delivery courses. Interviews were conducted with 11 participants. Two organizational models were identified. Other issues that emerged in the development of distance delivery courses were: faculty ownership of distance courses; workload implications for faculty; clinical practice by distance; and faculty expertise in new technologies. Implications for incorporating the challenges facing nursing faculty in the 21st century in the development of distance delivery courses are discussed.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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