MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980892014 · doi:10.28945/2236

Curriculum Development of an ICT4D Module in the South African Context

2015· article· en· W2980892014 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Caroline Khene

Bibliographic record

VenueInforming Science and IT Education Conference · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicICT in Developing Communities
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRoyal Holloway, University of LondonCouncil for the Development of Social Science Research in AfricaUniversity of OxfordUniversity of CambridgeInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsCurriculumContext (archaeology)Information and Communications TechnologyDeveloping countryICTSKnowledge managementEngineering ethicsPolitical scienceSociologyComputer sciencePedagogyEngineeringEconomic growthGeographyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

[The final form of this paper was published in the journal Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology.] The significance of ICTs in supporting socio-economic development in developing countries is inevitable. As academics of information systems in developing countries, we cannot ignore the need for teaching and building the capacity of our students to become knowledgeable and skilled in Information and Communication Technology for Development (ICT4D) practice and discourse. Furthermore, it is vital to equip our students with the ability to apply their discipline knowledge in addressing some of the ICT discrepancies in current ICT4D practice in their own context. I introduced and teach the ICT4D module to the Honours level course at my university in South Africa. This paper explores the influencing aspects that shaped the development of the ICT4D module curriculum in the South African context I teach in. This provides a practice lens to motivate for and support the introduction of an ICT4D module in tertiary curricula in developing countries.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.238 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInforming Science and IT Education ConferenceSame topicICT in Developing CommunitiesFrench-language works237,207