MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2337409175 · doi:10.2304/elea.2004.1.1.1

E-Learning Machines

2004· article· en· W2337409175 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueE-Learning and Digital Media · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedia, Communication, and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSkepticismConversationConstructiveElectronic mediaEpistemologyMedia studiesComputer scienceSociologyPhilosophyLinguisticsMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I am delighted to write this editorial for the inaugural issue of E-Learning. It is an exciting first issue with articles from a range of experts who analyse and discuss in critical and constructive terms some fundamental aspects of elearning – a concept whose time has come. Yet it has passed almost silently into the language of education without much critical thought. It is as though the addition of ‘e’ – with a hyphen – indicates simply a change of medium as though it was ‘business as usual’, except we experience the substitution of an electronic medium for classroom ‘talk’ or other structured educational media instruction. It was Marshall McLuhan, the Canadian media philosopher, who first taught us to look at the deep structure of media when he stated ‘the medium is the message’, the title of his famous book, later changing it to The Medium is the Massage (McLuhan, 1967). McLuhan, we must remember was educated at Cambridge by I.A. Richards and schooled on James Joyce, the symbolist poets and Ezra Pound. In other words, he had a well-developed appreciation of literature and had gained sophisticated knowledge and practice of its tools of analysis as a basis for his critical approach to understanding media.[1] With e-learning, then, we must be willing to recognise the deep structure of the medium and this means, among other things, to learn to become sceptical of histories that are ‘event driven’ or ‘personality driven’ or ‘technology driven’. In conversation with a colleague and friend, Bob Davis at the University of Glasgow, I was recently reminded of Jonathan Swift’s ‘writing machine’ as he sketches it in Book 4 of Gulliver’s Travels:

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.762
Threshold uncertainty score0.552

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.278 · 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