MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2986730131 · doi:10.24135/pjtel.v2i1.24

CMALT and cMOOC - a community of educators and their learning technologies

2019· article· en· W2986730131 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lisa Ransom

Bibliographic record

VenuePacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAuckland University of Technology, New Zealand
KeywordsAccreditationPresentation (obstetrics)Bridge (graph theory)Learning communityMedical educationCommunity engagementPublic relationsPolitical scienceSociologyEngineeringPedagogyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CMALT is a peer-reviewed accreditation based upon the UKPSF (UK Professional Standards Framework) to enable staff (whether academic or administrative) who embed learning technologies in either their teaching or support roles, to showcase their experiences and gain recognition. This programme has been developed by ALT and is co-delivered online, by ASCILITE.
 
 Building upon the experiences of supporting a geographically distributed project involving six institutions nationally across New Zealand during 2014-2015, we (AUT) have developed a support structure for building communities around CMALT accreditation using a cMOOC model. The cMOOC framework enables us to bridge and broker authentic participation within an international community of academics and learning technologists interested in exploring CMALT accreditation, and we have had participation from the UK, Japan, Canada, Australia, and NZ. The CMALT cMOOC was developed in 2017 by the Centre for Learning and Teaching, at Auckland University of Technology, and endorsed by ALT and ASCILITE in 2019.
 
 This presentation will highlight the ecology of resources that are used to support the community and hear from current participants of the programme

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0020.021
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.004

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePacific Journal of Technology Enhanced LearningSame topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207