MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2886499551 · doi:10.14288/1.0300309

Witnessing the extraordinary : investigating the accomplishments of the ALGC program

2016· article· en· W2886499551 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Armindo Fontana

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the reasons behind the achievements of the Adult Learning and Global Change (ALGC) program, an international online master’s program developed and managed by four universities in Canada, Sweden, South Africa and Australia: The University of British Columbia (Canada), Linköping University (Sweden), The University of the Western Cape (South Africa) and three different universities in Australia (where the original partner, University of Technology Sydney, was replaced by Monash University, which is now being replaced by Australian Catholic University). The twelve individuals who have had leadership roles in the program since it began in 2001 were interviewed, and their answers to the same open ended questions provided the data for analysis. Based on their responses, it was possible to identify the six stages in the development of the program, the many accomplishments of the program from a variety of viewpoints (historical, educational, collaborative, administrative and personal), the different threats and weaknesses that endangered the program (and the way they were addressed), and, finally, the explanations for the accomplishments of the program. The conclusion is that thanks to its competent and committed leaders, a creative and innovative program, and constructive and caring relationships, the ALGC program has not only survived but thrived.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0020.006
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes→French-language works237,207→