MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2220100447 · doi:10.5334/2004-9-mcgreal

Commentary on: Simon, B., Dolog., P., Miklós, Z., Olmedilla, D. and Sintek, M. (2004). Conceptualising Smart Spaces for Learning

2004· article· en· W2220100447 on OpenAlexaff
Rory McGreal

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Interactive Media in Education (Open University) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Learning in Education
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWorld Wide WebPlan (archaeology)Space (punctuation)SoftwareCollaborative learningMultimediaKnowledge managementOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Sm a rt Space for Learning (SSL) is a proposed software application system s u p p o rting access to individualized learning materials and experiences using Pe r s o n a l Learning Assistants (PLAs).PLAs are intelligent agent software applications that aid the learner in searching for re l e vant content across a distributed network.They hold the promise of harnessing the power of the network to break the cost barriers that h a ve restricted learning environments to time-and location-dependent cohort g roups.Using SSL, individual learners should be able to navigate their way thro u g h the large mass of materials available on the World Wide Web and build themselves a c o h e rent and cohesive learning plan that is independent of time and place.These personal learning services re p resent the "Holy Gr a i l" in education.For the first time, thanks to the Semantic We b, large masses of learners using online learning applications and services will be able to access "p e r s o n a l i ze d" learning opport u n i t i e s that are at the same time appropriate and re l e vant to their individual or gro u p learning needs.Since the dawn of mass education in the nineteenth century, the only economically rational means of mass education has been the cohort model in which students have been "herd e d" and grouped by age or academic interest into education factories or schools (Thornburg, 1992).Howe ver from the time of Bathe (1611) and Comenius (1631), enlightened educators have been extolling the virtues of learning materials, activities, and e n v i ronments made re l e vant to the experiences of the individual learner.Up to the p resent it has not been possible to support this learning model in a cost-effective w a y, and so cohort-based learning continues to pre d o m i n a t e .For centuries traditional classroom-based courses and more recently industrialize d distance education models have dominated the educational landscape.Pa s s i ve i n s t ruction through correspondence courses, which emerged in the nineteenth c e n t u ry re q u i red self-study skills and self-discipline to ove rcome the lack of support and mentoring available in the classroom.Twentieth century video/televised courses, aimed at large numbers of learners individually, or assembled in groups, incorporated C o m m e n t a ry on:

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Interactive Media in Education (Open University)Same topicMobile Learning in EducationFrench-language works237,207