MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2256806973

To Scenarize the Assessment of an Educational Activity

2006· article· en· W2256806973 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Guillaume Durand, Christian Martel

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Computer scienceSet (abstract data type)Work (physics)Knowledge managementEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present our work which deals with learner assessment in the context of a scenarized learning activity. We propose in this context to scenarize assessment in a specific scenario. Assessment is then considered as an activity being able to be scenarized. But scenario languages and infrastructures are not designed for assessment scenarios. Based on LDL (Learning Design Language), a scenario language, and its infrastructure, we set out the way in which we have dealt with this problem. Indeed the scenarization of an assessment requires improvements in order to allow the expression of the results and their communication between scenarized activities. To express the results, a specific results model is proposed for the scenario infrastructure. This model makes it possible to exchange, store and of course to evaluate the results obtained from a scenarized learning activity.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.397 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207