MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Guidelines for Design and Implementation of Mobile Learning

2016· book-chapter· en· W2486269939 on OpenAlex
Mohamed Ally, Mohammed Samaka

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in educational technologies and instructional design book series · 2016
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Learning in Education
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaceMobile technologyComputer scienceMultimediaQuality (philosophy)Mobile deviceMobile business developmentEngineering managementKnowledge managementEngineeringMobile WebWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As technology evolves, there is a shift towards the use of mobile technology to deliver education both on-campus in a blended format and online delivery. This shift is moving at a very fast pace which is a major challenge for educational organizations which has to train staff and build the infrastructure for mobile delivery. Educators have to be trained on how to develop quality mobile learning materials, how to use the technology for the delivery, and how to provide quality support to students so that they are successful when using mobile technology to learn. This chapter provides guidelines for designing and implementing mobile learning.

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)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.385
Threshold uncertainty score0.957

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 communication0.0000.002
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.298 · 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