MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3081212636 · doi:10.1177/2379298120947093

Acadly: An Online Platform for Engaged Learning

2020· article· en· W3081212636 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Teaching Review · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrading (engineering)AttendanceComputer scienceTracking (education)Student engagementLearning ManagementMultimediaMathematics educationKnowledge managementWorld Wide WebPsychologyEngineeringPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Faculty and students alike can benefit from the use of educational technology, yet keeping up with the latest developments can pose a challenge for busy faculty. This article reviews one tool that could be used to facilitate teaching and learning in face-to-face, hybrid, or online courses. Acadly is an online platform and mobile application providing capabilities such as automated attendance, in-page discussion threads, and participation tracking. Acadly functions similarly to learning management systems yet differs in ways that some faculty and students may find appealing. The article discusses the strengths and limitations of the tool based on usage in five sections of an undergraduate organizational behavior course. Acadly appears to be useful in helping students organize their work and in facilitating greater student engagement. A notable limitation is that it currently lacks advanced grading capabilities.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.256 · 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