MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2173453008 · doi:10.1186/s40660-015-0002-0

On supporting e-learning in the field of resilience management with an open source authoring tool

2015· article· en· W2173453008 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Luca Ferrari, Luigi Guerra, Silvia Mirri, Silvio Olivastri, Paola Salomoni

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology Innovation and Education · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicE-Learning and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversità di BolognaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsPersonalizationComputer scienceAuthoring systemOpen educational resourcesLearning ManagementMultimediaWorld Wide WebOpen sourceContext (archaeology)Field (mathematics)Knowledge managementSoftware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Among all the pedagogical and technological features that could be used with the aim of improving and making more effective online education, we have identified virtual and augmented reality-based technologies and the creation and sharing of digital open resources as interesting issues not yet adequately covered. Both of them can be exploited in the current and trendy Massive Online Open Courses (MOOCs) scenario, so as to make their content and activities more interactive and effective. Furthermore, a key role is played by all the online tools (authoring tools / pedagogical planners) that support, on one side, authors in creating contents and, on the other, learners in exploiting them while they are acquiring skills and competencies. We have designed, developed and customized an e-learning authoring tool, called BEAT (Bologna E-learning Authoring Tool). This paper focuses on main design issues and on the customization of BEAT devoted to meet the needs of the RESINT project, with the aim of supporting authors in creating (designing and editing) and managing interactive and Open Educational Resources. One of the expected results of this project is to create an open source authoring tool to support authors during the creation of open learning objects, accessible (and reusable) through Learning Content Management Systems. A use case in the context of resilience management-related topics is also illustrated in the paper.

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 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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.309
Threshold uncertainty score0.171

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTechnology Innovation and EducationSame topicE-Learning and Knowledge ManagementFrench-language works237,207