MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990331622 · doi:10.52358/mm.vi2.88

Quelques facteurs à prendre en considération pour réussir son cours en ligne

2019· article· fr· W2990331622 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Awatif Beggar

Bibliographic record

VenueMédiations et médiatisations · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse multidisciplinary academic research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les innovations numériques sont de plus en plus nombreuses dans le domaine de l’enseignement. Ces nouvelles pratiques nécessitent la prise en considération de certains paramètres pour un meilleur apprentissage. En effet, l’effet de la fascination technologique ou "la pseudo-autonomie" des apprenants peuvent inhiber l’apprentissage et constituer des points de blocage dans le processus de l’enseignement en ligne. Quant à la littératie numérique, la scénarisation des contenus, la proposition d’activités et de projets pour motiver les étudiants, ils peuvent fonder une nouvelle relation au savoir à l’ère du numérique. La pédagogie en présentiel diffère de celle qu’il faut adopter en ligne. Passer de l’espace métrique à l’espace virtuel impose des changements d’ordre pédagogique à ne pas négliger pour réussir un cours en ligne.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.672
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.009

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.321 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueMédiations et médiatisationsSame topicDiverse multidisciplinary academic researchFrench-language works237,207