MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048748034 · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v9n6p1

EFL Students Perspective towards Online Learning Barriers and Alternatives Using Moodle/Google Classroom during COVID-19 Pandemic

2020· article· en· W3048748034 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Like Raskova Octaberlina, Afif Ikhwanul Muslimin

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Higher Education · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology-Enhanced Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Learning ManagementGovernment (linguistics)Class (philosophy)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Online learningThe InternetLearning stylesPandemicBlended learningComputer scienceDescriptive statisticsE learningPsychologyMathematics educationMedical educationMultimediaEducational technologyWorld Wide WebMedicineArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Covid-19 pandemic has made many countries adapt on new situations in different sectors including education. The Indonesia government has decided to adjust the education mode from face-to-face to online meeting using various learning management systems (LMS) such as moodle and google classroom. Moreover, the present research depicted the online learning barriers faced by students as well as their alternatives to cope them. The research implemented descriptive mixed-method survey design. The participants were 25 students of English Education Department. The instruments used to gather the data were the questionnaires and interview regarding the topics. The results showed that students experienced three barriers during the online learning including infamiliriaty of e-learning, slow internet connection, and physical condition e.g. eye strain. The alternatives they proposed were providing training to implement the LMS before the real class, converting high-definition or big-size files into smaller one, and giving break during the online class. The conclusion stated that students had to be creatives to find any solutions and innovations regarding learning barriers including maintaining good communication with teacher and understanding best learning styles individually

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.400 · 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

Citations279
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Higher EducationSame topicTechnology-Enhanced Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207