MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Redesigning the Information Systems Analysis and Design Course: Curriculum Renewal

2014· article· en· W2186554372 on OpenAlexaff
Shouhong Wang, Hai Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computer Information Systems · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation Systems Education and Curriculum Development
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCourse (navigation)CurriculumInformation systemManagement information systemsEngineering managementInformation technologyComputer scienceStructured systems analysis and design methodKnowledge managementSystems designProcess managementEngineeringSoftware engineeringPsychologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To meet the challenge of stable low enrollments in the Management Information System (MIS) programs, the renewal of the MIS curriculum and the pedagogies is imperative. While he MIS renewal strategies vary depending upon the university programs, the redesign MIS major courses for all business majors can be a feasible approach to increasing the enrollment of MIS courses in the business programs where many business majors demand advanced information technology courses. This paper presents a case of redesign of the information systems analysis and design course for all business majors. It explains the motivation of redesign, the major consideration of redesign, and the implementation of redesign of this course. Our preliminary study for the assessment of the redesigned course has indicated that the information systems analysis and design course can be a valuable MIS elective course for all non-MIS majors.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations14
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computer Information SystemsSame topicInformation Systems Education and Curriculum DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207