MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894828986

Three Stories on Learning Analytics Show How Far Institutions Can Go With Data

2018· article· en· W2894828986 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hermanus Beldhuis, Allyson Skene, Ian Holder

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLearning analyticsAnalyticsData scienceData analysisBlackboard (design pattern)Computer scienceSoftware analyticsKnowledge managementData miningSoftware
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of learning analytics is the strategic application of the data toward the goals education institutions have,” says Rachel Scherer, director of analytics at Blackboard. Explore three learning analytics stories from Australia, Canada and the Netherlands for a better understanding of how learning analytics can impact colleges and universities and help them achieve their strategic goals.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.058
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.058
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0140.019
Scholarly communication0.0210.031
Open science0.0020.014
Research integrity0.0080.018
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.289
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology)Same topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207