MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993010578 · doi:10.47678/cjhe.v33i3.183442

Review of Understanding Virtual Universities

2003· article· en· W2993010578 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bill Egnatoff

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Higher Education · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigher educationBusinessMathematics educationSociologyComputer sciencePsychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rada sees cultural transmission as the aim of the university and sees teaching as the principal means of achieving it.The virtual university, with its digital nervous system to support thinking and collaboration, extends existing social mechanisms for transmission of accumulated knowledge.The understanding to which Understanding Virtual Universities contributes is based on: psychological principles of teaching and learning related to computer-mediated learning; analysis of recent and current use of information and communications technology in higher education; the author's broad experience as scholar, teacher, and administrator; the history of universities and technology; integrated-systems thinking; means-end analysis and quality control; cost-benefit analysis; knowledge management; involvement of business and industry in higher education; and analysis of new market opportunities for universities.The book emphasizes an approach to using information and communication technology that is tightly integrated across learning, teaching, and administration, in a rapidly changing social context.Roy Rada is an active scholar in the fields of health care information systems, virtual educational organizations, and workflow management who holds degrees in psychology (B.A.), medicine (M.D.), and Computer Science (Ph.D.).He has 20 years experience developing and using online collaborative learning systems.In addition to teaching

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.293 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Higher EducationSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207