MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Conversation Design in the Electronic Discussion Age

2008· book-chapter· en· W2492243454 on OpenAlexaff
Gregory MacKinnon

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2008
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConversationComputer scienceMathematics educationCollaborative learningPsychologyPedagogyCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of the chapter to examine a way in which Pask’ s conversation theory (CT) can be used as a theoretical framework for designing blended courses using a collaborative inquiry approach for teaching and learning in campus-based university. This chapter comprises three parts that explains a) the constructs of CT, and their relations in regard to online collaborative inquiry, b) the four principles derived from the constructs of CT and the possible use of these principles to design a blended course, and c) how the effects of these constructs can be used to assess the effectiveness of this CT based blended course design. This chapter is concluded with the discussion and implications for course design, and future research on CT.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.726
Threshold uncertainty score0.810

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207