MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921776573 · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v20i1.3924

OER Mainstreaming in Tonga

2019· article· en· W2921776573 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ishan Sudeera Abeywardena, Philip Uys, Seilosehina Fifita

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOpen Education and E-Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBộ Giáo dục và Ðào tạoWilliam and Flora Hewlett Foundation
KeywordsMainstreamingOpen educational resourcesLivelihoodCommonwealthSustainable developmentPolitical scienceEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningGeographyComputer scienceLibrary scienceSpecial educationEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the race towards achieving the Education 2030 agenda, open educational resources (OER) act as a key enabler for sustainable development goal 4 (SDG4). Leading to the 2014 Regional Focal Points Meeting, Commonwealth of Learning’s (COL) Focal Point for Tonga had identified top priorities for the country where COL can further support the national agenda till 2021. Based on these needs, the Strategic OER Implementation Project in Tonga was initiated by COL in response to a request by the Ministry of Education and Training (MET) of Tonga. The project aims to assist MET in (a) developing a framework for fully utilizing the new fiber optic network infrastructure to deliver online learning to Tongans distributed in the 45 islands; and (b) improve the chances of sustainable livelihoods for Tongan youth by training them in life skills tailored to higher education and employment opportunities in Australia and New Zealand. This paper details the use of the horizontal framework for OER mainstreaming and the OER mainstreaming checklist within this project. The novelty of this project is its approach to mainstreaming OER at an institution in a systemic manner. The contribution this paper makes is to provide a proven plan for sustainable OER mainstreaming in a development setting.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.544
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed LearningSame topicOpen Education and E-LearningFrench-language works237,207