MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The CMS as Shapeshifter, Catalyst, and Engaging Learning Tool

2005· book-chapter· en· W2486558066 on OpenAlexaff
Cyprien Lomas, Ulrich Rauch

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2005
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOpen Education and E-Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersuasionAppealDutyComputer scienceMultimediaWorld Wide WebHuman–computer interactionEngineeringPsychologyPolitical scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Content management systems (CMS) have been purposed for different tasks on our campuses and are in danger of becoming all things to all people. In our discussion we re-evaluate those aspects of a CMS that appear to make the greatest impact on teaching and learning. While a CMS may do duty as a vessel for containing and interacting with content, we see its greatest appeal and persuasion in its availability to all learners and teachers and its potential to transform itself according to a user’s need. By separately analyzing common uses and current applications of a CMS, we identify the tools and components of a CMS that offer the most promise in the future.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.238 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicOpen Education and E-LearningFrench-language works237,207