MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2607229021 · doi:10.5539/hes.v7n2p35

An e-Portfolio-based Model for the Application and Sharing of College English ESP MOOCs

2017· article· en· W2607229021 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jinshi Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReflective Practices in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFormative assessmentPortfolioComputer scienceKnowledge sharingKnowledge managementShared resourceCollege EnglishResource (disambiguation)Teaching methodMathematics educationEngineering managementBusinessEngineeringPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The informationalized knowledge sharing of MOOCs not only promotes the change of teaching concept and the reform of teaching methodology, but also provides a new opportunity for the teaching resource integration and sharing between different universities. The present study has constructed an e-Portfolio-based model for the application and sharing of college English ESP MOOCs. In this model, college English ESP MOOCs developed by different universities have been put into the e-Portfolio-based platform for application and sharing, and those MOOCs will be applied in the specific ESP teaching and learning processes. It is hoped that the application of the model will accelerate the development, application and sharing of teaching resources, and the coordination and innovation of knowledge between universities, and advance the professional interaction and the cultivation of interdisciplinary talents based on formative assessment.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.373 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher Education StudiesSame topicReflective Practices in EducationFrench-language works237,207