Evalution of on-line courses developed at the Faculty of Teacher Education (University of Zagreb) – one possible model of evalution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
U ovom radu je (u ravnopravnom suautorstvu) ostvaren sustavni razvitak raznovrsnog kompjuterskog obrazovanja (CBE) u svim pojavnim oblicima (ukljucujuci integrirane sustave ucenja, interaktivne multimedije, interaktivna okruženja ucenja i mikrosvjetove) te je uoceno da oblici cesto zaostaju iza ukupnog tijeka razvoja (Flagg, 1990.). U izvornom znanstvenom radu je analiticki i informacijski razmatran razvitak „ on line” predavanja razvijenih na Uciteljskom fakultetu – u domeni odgojnih i informacijskih znanosti. Predavanja koja su bila namijenjena kao dopuna predavanjima i seminarima bila su razvijena kao pilot projekt koristeci Moodle LMS (ucenje sustavom upravljanja). Razvojni kriterij koji je koristen bio je baziran na iskustvu osoblja u Nastavnom odjelu i oblikovanom odjeljenju u Grant MacEwan College, Edminton, Alberta, Canada i njihovih jedanaest referentnih tocaka. S obzirom na cinjenicu da su predavanja razvijena jos u njihovom pokusnom periodu to nije bilo iznenađujuce kada se konacni rezultat pokazao bogat prostorom za poboljsanje. Doprinos znanosti je ostvaren u domeni razvoja novog modela on-line nastave te relevantnog evaluacijskog sustava pracenja i vrednovanja iste.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".