MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2466319500 · doi:10.5120/ijca2016908039

Experimenting the Effectiveness of Traditional vs Modern Learning of Web Technologies among Computer Professional Students

2016· article· en· W2466319500 on OpenAlexaff
Navaneetha Krishnan R, Manoj Kannan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Computer Applications · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsCanadian Standards Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMultimediaWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of the study is to analyze the opinion about traditional and online learning methods with respect to course, content, teacher and reachability.Keeping this in view, a software study was conducted and which was aimed to develop the learning tool which is known as "Knowledge Connection" for Sank-Hara Computer Centre for Education and Learning.It is an intranet/internet based learning tool based on blended learning methodology.Pre Hypertext Processor, Apache Web Server and Mysql as the back end and other tools such as Dream weaver were used to create a learning model and SPSS 20 were used to interpret the results.Sample of 100 respondents were taken for the study based on simple random sampling method.The findings reveal that the students are much more interested towards online environment based on their mean value.This study is unique in the sense that new user friendly learning tool have been deployed to test the results.The results will be helpful to introduce more number of online courses which can be incorporated in the syllabus to enrich more knowledge towards knowledge society.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Computer ApplicationsSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207