[The Internet:an alternative to face-to-face training for teachers in remote locations?].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PROBLEM ADDRESSED: For some family medicine supervisors working in rural and remote areas, access to face-to-face training is problematic. They need distance training programs designed specifically for them. OBJECTIVE OF PROGRAM: To study the advantages, disadvantages, and feasibility of a training program for these supervisors that is delivered over the Internet. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: This was a pilot project for international on-line training consisting of a platform of courses and a collaborative type of Web conferencing that ran for 2 hours each week for 5 weeks. The training focused on the acquisition of teaching skills and the use of information and communications technology, and included discussions on topics related to practising and teaching in rural areas. CONCLUSION: Such a program is feasible and economical. The main difficulties are recruiting participants, keeping them in the program, and the amount of time spent on development and supervision. Participants who persevered reported high levels of satisfaction. The content of this type of training, barriers to participation, and the role of distance education in rural supervisor training programs remain to be explored.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.042 | 0.010 |
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".