MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2528627073 · doi:10.3402/gha.v9.28145

Student experiences of participating in five collaborative blended learning courses in Africa and Asia: a survey

2016· article· en· W2528627073 on OpenAlexaff
Salla Atkins, Weirong Yan, Elnta Meragia, Hassan Mahomed, Senia Rosales-Klintz, Donald G. Skinner, Merrick Zwarenstein

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Health Action · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsLogistic regressionMedical educationOdds ratioConfidence intervalPsychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: As blended learning (BL; a combination of face-to-face and e-learning methods) becomes more commonplace, it is important to assess whether students find it useful for their studies. ARCADE HSSR and ARCADE RSDH (African Regional Capacity Development for Health Systems and Services Research; Asian Regional Capacity Development for Research on Social Determinants of Health) were unique capacity-building projects, focusing on developing BL in Africa and Asia on issues related to global health. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the student experience of participating in any of five ARCADE BL courses implemented collaboratively at institutions from Africa, Asia, and Europe. DESIGN: A post-course student survey with 118 students was conducted. The data were collected using email or through an e-learning platform. Data were analysed with SAS, using bivariate and multiple logistic regression. We focused on the associations between various demographic and experience variables and student-reported overall perceptions of the courses. RESULTS: =0.0036, OR=0.165; 95% CI: 0.049-0.555) were found to be associated with a more positive perception of BL, as measured by student rating of the overall helpfulness of the e-learning component to their studies. In contrast, perceiving the assessment as adequate was associated with a worse perception of overall usefulness. In a multiple regression, the course, experiencing no technical problems, and perceiving the discussion as adequate remained significantly associated with a more positively rated perception of the usefulness of the online component of the blended courses. DISCUSSION: The results suggest that lack of technical problems and functioning discussion forums are of importance during BL courses focusing on global health-related topics. Through paying attention to these aspects, global health education could be provided using BL approaches to student satisfaction.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.394 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations32
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Health ActionSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207