To click or not to click: E‐learning for the public sector
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: E‐learning is being mooted as a cheap and effective way to provide public servants and public‐sector organizations with the continuous learning opportunities required to recruit and retain good employees and improve organizational outcomes. This article draws on the extensive literature on e‐learning and the authors' experience with the development and delivery of e‐learning to examine a number of issues that public‐sector managers should consider before embracing e‐learning. The article begins by sorting out what e‐learning is, what forms it can take and how significant a phenomenon it has become in the private and public sectors in Canada and elsewhere. Emerging Canadian government e‐learning strategies are noted. The authors argue that much existing formal e‐learning material is ineffective and set out criteria for identifying viable e‐learning approaches. The claim that e‐learning provides enhanced access to training is critically examined. The authors also argue that the adoption of e‐learning will radically affect the organization of training and its relationship to the wider organization. Finally, the authors critically examine the issue of whether or not e‐learning is cheaper than face‐to‐face instruction. They contend that e‐learning can reduce training delivery costs in some circumstances but that the costs associated with developing and delivering effective e‐learning will be substantial. Sommaire: On a dit que l'apprentissage en ligne est un moyen efficace et peu coûteux offrant aux fonctionnaires des possibilités de formation continue qui permettront aux organismes du secteur public de recruter et de retenir du personnel qualifié et ainsi d'améliorer leurs résultats organisationnels. Cet article repose sur la documentation concernant l'apprentissage en ligne et l'expérience des auteurs en matière d'élaboration et de prestation de cette méthode d'enseignement afin d'examiner un certain nombre de questions que les gestionnaires du secteur public devraient étudier avant de les adopter. L'article commence par expliquer l'apprentissage en ligne sous ses différentes formes et l'importance de ce phénomène dans les secteurs privé et public au Canada et ailleurs. Les nouvelles stratégies d'apprentissage en ligne du gouvemement canadien sont mentionnées. Les auteurs affirment qu'une grande partie de la documentation officielle sur la question est inefficace et ils présentent des critères pour determiner les méthodes d'apprentissage en ligne qui ont des chances de réussir en matière de formation. Ils examinent d'un œil critique si cette méthode d'enseignement foumit en fait un meilleur accès è la formation. L'article laisse éggalement entendre que l'adoption de l'apprentissage en ligne transformera radicalement la planification de la formation et ses relations avec l'organisation plus vaste. Enfin, les auteurs examinent attentivement la question de savoir si oui ou non l'apprentissage en ligne est moins coûteux que l'enseignement en personne. Ils soutiennent que cette méhode peut permettre de réduire les coûts de prestation de la formation dans certaines circonstances mais que les coûts associés à l'élaboration et à la prestation de l'apprentissage en ligne efficace seront considérables.
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 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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".