MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143087432 · doi:10.5944/ried.17.2.12677

DESAFIOS DA FORMAÇÃO CONTÍNUA A DISTÂNCIA PARA PROFESSORES DE CIÊNCIAS

2014· article· pt· W2143087432 on OpenAlexaff
Paulo Sérgio García, Nélio Bizzo, Xavier Fazio

Bibliographic record

VenueRIED Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia · 2014
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Digital Technologies
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutonomyPsychologyPedagogyProcess (computing)Medical educationPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the personal characteristics, the current concerns, and the challenges of academic study. In addition, it examines the investment (efforts) of science teachers who participated in distance education courses (CDEC) at a public university. Data were collected from interviews and then analyzed qualitatively using codes and descriptors. Autonomy, motivation, discipline and responsibility were some of the key characteristics of the teachers evaluated in this study. Concerns regarding training needs, students’ expectations with regard to their success in the course, the interaction process, the acquired skills, and the technologies used, were identified and later recorded. The greatest challenges faced by lecturers in successfully managing the distance education process were related to study skills (organization), personal discipline, and autonomy. Finally, the results show that intellectual and emotional effort is required to participate in this type of online training. Furthermore, the findings from this study may facilitate course management trainers, thereby assisting CDEC lecturers during the entire learning process, and maximize the potential of science education.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRIED Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a DistanciaSame topicEducation and Digital TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207