MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044526341 · doi:10.5539/hes.v10n3p80

Digital Practices & Applications in a Covid-19 Culture

2020· article· en· W3044526341 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDigital Storytelling and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlended learningPedagogyTeaching methodDistance educationSociologyHigher educationEducational technologyBest practicePsychologyMedical educationMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article addresses reflections of one University instructor’s teaching and her pre-teacher education students’ innovative digital learning practices during the Covid-19 pandemic in Spring 2020. The question of How has one instructor embedded digital practices in her virtual teaching to engage and purposefully introduce and connect pre-teacher education students with diverse technologies and multimodalities of learning during a mandatory virtual instruction time? will be addressed and discussed. Student-centered practices such as group work, pair work, the use of Zoom breakout rooms, and multimodal literary responses through technology applications such as Flipgrid and Google Docs will be described and reflected upon. The instructor’s own teaching practices that have included weekly mentoring meetings with her education students and continuing individual coffee meetings in diverse settings will be highlighted as ways of demonstrating care and encouragement toward face-to-face students who have been transitioned as online students. The reflections outlined in this abstract draw upon the notion of technologies as providers of active interactions and will include snapshots of an instructors’ students’ digital artifacts such as Flipgrid, video-recorded monologues, and Google Doc news stories with students reflecting on the uses of multimodal technologies in their own future teaching practices. This manuscript will also include student reflections and a sidebar of suggestions for using Zoom with virtual 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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.518
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.296
GPT teacher head0.541
Teacher spread0.244 · 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