Instructors' experiences of web based synchronous communication using two way audio and direct messaging
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
<span>This paper reports on an exploratory case study designed to gain insight into instructors' experiences with web based synchronous communication using two way audio and direct messaging. We conducted semi-structured interviews with eight instructors who used </span><em>Elluminate Live</em><span> in their web based, asynchronous courses in Education, Nursing, and Social Work at a Canadian university during the Winter 2004-05. We grouped the findings into two categories. The first category relates to use of text based communication or direct messaging (DM). We subdivided this category as follows: trouble shooting versus teaching; and public versus private conversations. The second category relates to use of voice based communication or audio conferencing (two way audio) subdivided into four sub-categories as follows: talkers versus listeners; patience versus prompting; whole group versus breakout groups; and two way versus one way communication. Use of text based messaging and two way audio raised issues of the need to divide one's attention and to promote student-student interaction. Implications for research and practice are presented.</span>
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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