MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2180599284

Reflections on the role of faculty in distance learning and changing pedagogies.

2004· article· en· W2180599284 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marilyn Ryan, Kay Hodson Carlton, Nagia S. Ali

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Faculty developmentDistance educationParadigm shiftNurse educationMedical educationPedagogyPsychologyProfessional developmentSociologyMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing number of nursing faculty teaching in distance education programs represents a paradigm shift that has implications for faculty role and changing pedagogies. This descriptive study investigated experiences of nursing faculty teaching web-based courses. Participants were drawn from eight nursing schools in the United States and Canada. Nineteen faculty discussed perceptions of teaching online in small-group teleconference interviews. Major categories identified were: faculty role issues, redesigning/rethinking courses, handling communications, developing partnerships, managing time, and dealing with technology. The core category was: redesigning pedagogies and rethinking faculty role for online teaching. Dimensional analysis was used to develop a matrix telling the story of the experience within the perspectives of antecedent conditions, context, strategies, and consequences. Results indicated that support systems, technology partnerships, and policies should be in place before redesign. The context of redesign was evident in moving from "on stage" to a virtual environment. Strategies used to redesign courses included collaboration, rethinking communications, and faculty development. Consequences had positive and negative outcomes with respect to their impact on faculty role, teaching approaches, and student/faculty relationships.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.677
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations79
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207