MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2566663319 · doi:10.5539/mas.v11n1p242

Facilitating Network Technology Training in the Australian Vocational Education Sector

2016· article· en· W2566663319 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
J. Robertson McIlwain, Owen McIIwain, Stanislaw Maj

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVendorCertificateVocational educationCurriculumComputer scienceQuality (philosophy)Engineering managementMedical educationMathematics educationKnowledge managementPedagogyEngineeringPsychologyBusinessMedicineMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Within the Australian Further Education sector for lecturers in the IT field it is not uncommon to use vendor based curriculum. The advantages to this approach are that students can graduate not only with a national award (Certificate or Diploma) and also an internationally recognized vendor qualification. Furthermore, the larger vendors supply comprehensive course materials, resources and assessment tools all of which have been extensively tested. In effect lecturers do not have to write their own course materials. Whilst it is recognized that lecturers may well facilitate student learning the quality of the educational outcomes is highly dependent on the quality of the vendor based materials. In the case of the Cisco Network Academy Program (CNAP) course materials did not provide a consistent diagrammatic representation of networking devices and protocols. Educational theory strongly suggests that such a model is the basis of quality teaching and learning. In this study student learning was evaluated using the State Model Diagram (SMD) method and the interpreted using the SOLO taxonomy. The results clearly demonstrate that there are considerable advantages to using the SMD method.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.751
Threshold uncertainty score0.447

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.211 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicComplex Systems and Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207