MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Using computer conferencing and case studies to enable collaboration between expert and novice teachers

2005· article· en· W2141038157 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

VenueJournal of Computer Assisted Learning · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsAthabasca UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsynchronous communicationComputer-mediated communicationAsynchronous learningComputer-Assisted InstructionDistance educationTeleconferenceComputer scienceMathematics educationRelation (database)Teaching methodPsychologyMultimediaPedagogyThe InternetSynchronous learningCooperative learningWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper reports on a teaching innovation where groups of experienced and novice teachers collaborated in analyzing case studies involving the education of students with special learning needs. The teachers collaborated in an asynchronous computer conferencing system (Web Knowledge Forum). All participants were enrolled in special education graduate courses taught by the authors. The authors discuss the use of case studies in teacher education, collaboration between novice and expert teachers, and highlight some of the demands of computer conferencing particularly in relation to the loss of face‐to‐face interactions and the interpretive demands of electronic communication.

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)0.003
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.779
Threshold uncertainty score0.735

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.319 · 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