MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2738233869 · doi:10.1177/2379298117720444

Tools for Teaching Virtual Teams: A Comparative Resource Review

2017· article· en· W2738233869 on OpenAlexaff
Barbara Larson, Opal Leung, Kenneth Mullane

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Teaching Review · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicTeam Dynamics and Performance
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsynchronous communicationTask (project management)Virtual teamWork (physics)Computer scienceVirtual machineKnowledge managementResource (disambiguation)Instructional simulationEngineering managementVirtual realityHuman–computer interactionEngineeringSystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the ubiquity of virtual work—and particularly virtual project teams—increases in the professional environment, management and other professional programs are increasingly teaching students skills related to virtual work. One of the most common forms of teaching virtual work skills is a virtual team project, in which students collaborate with each other at a distance (and sometimes between multiple institutions) to accomplish a shared task. These projects differ from most management topics in their technology requirements. In this comparative review, we describe the features and trade-offs inherent in some of the asynchronous and synchronous communication technology tools commonly used to run virtual team projects.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0140.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations16
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Teaching ReviewSame topicTeam Dynamics and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207