Learning Management Systems in Universities of Medical Sciences of Iran and Several Developed Countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background & Objective: The core of each WBT system is an online software called learning management system (LMS). The existence of such a system in each university is the minimum requirement for the application and development of WBT methods. The present study aimed to investigate the frequency of LMS usage in Iranian medical universities in comparison with the universities of developed countries. Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional analysis was performed in 2014. The study population consisted of Iranian medical universities and the universities of 4 developed English-speaking countries, including USA, Canada, Australia, and UK. From among the Iranian universities, a total of 52 universities were selected using the census method. Moreover, 58 universities were randomly selected from among 450 well-known universities of developed countries. The data from LMS of Iranian medical universities were collected through visiting university websites, telephone calls, and in some cases, face-to-face interviews. The data were analyzed by descriptive methods. Results: Of the 52 Iranian universities of medical sciences, 33 universities (63.5%) did not have any LMSs for delivery courses in academic degree programs. Of the 19 universities (36.5%) with LMSs, Moodle, ATutor, Docebo, and native-designed LMSs were found in 11, 4, 1, and 3 universities, respectively. In addition, 16 Iranian universities used open source LMSs and 3 used commercial LMSs. All 58 (100%) universities of developed countries used LMSs for delivery courses in their academic degree programs. Blackboard, Moodle, Canvas, Desire2learn, and Sakai were used in 30, 13, 8, 1, and 1 foreign universities, respectively. Moreover, 2 universities were in transition stage and 3 universities used the Mooc system. Conclusion: Iran universities showed a considerable difference from universities in developed countries in terms of frequency of LMS usage. Educational and IT administrators in Iran should fill this gap, especially at high ranking universities. Key Words: Learning management system (LMS), Universities of medical sciences, E-learning, Iran
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".