MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Summative and Formative Evaluations of Internet-Based Teaching

2000· book-chapter· en· W2339278484 on OpenAlexaff
Dat‐Dao Nguyen, Dennis Kira

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2000
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFormative assessmentSummative assessmentThe InternetComputer scienceClass (philosophy)MultimediaProcess (computing)World Wide WebMathematics educationPsychologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Teaching is a communication process in which a body of knowledge is delivered from an instructor to students (Gagne, 1985). This communication traditionally takes place in a classroom. With the proliferation of computer software and hardware at low costs and the ease of access to the World Wide Web, one should expect that the use of Internet and related information technologies will foster an alternative teaching environment. Previous works have reported on various Internet-based teaching aids such as using e-mail, posting information on a Web page and using the Internet to search for additional class materials. Integrating these teaching media in a larger framework of Distance Learning and Virtual Class (Hiltz, 1994), they would provide a synergistic effect in helping students acquire the desired body of knowledge efficiently. From this perspective, we discuss a framework for summative and formative evaluations of Internet-based teaching in higher education. The timely evaluation is necessary for the development and implementation of a new teaching/learning environment. It will assure that the technology meets the intended pedagogic goal of teaching by taking into account feedback from student-users.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.888
Threshold uncertainty score0.720

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations10
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207