MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3103103442 · doi:10.5539/res.v12n4p32

Student Vlog for Community Communication Through Social Lab

2020· article· en· W3103103442 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Pornpapatsorn Princhankol, Kuntida Thamwipat

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKing Mongkut's University of Technology Thonburi
KeywordsNonprobability samplingPresentation (obstetrics)Social mediaCLIPSPerceptionQuality (philosophy)PsychologyMedical educationMultimediaComputer scienceSociologyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research was aimed to develop student vlog for community communication through social lab under the ECT Vlog project. In this study, a social lab consists of 3 communities near King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi. Other objectives of this study were to determine the quality of the media and activities in this research, to evaluate the perception and the satisfaction of the sampling group towards the student vlog under the ECT Vlog project which was held in the second semester of the academic year 2019. The tools in this study consisted of questionnaires for the quality and the media presentation, the perception assessment form, and the satisfaction questionnaire. The sampling group in this study consisted of 100 followers of the ECT Vlog facebook page who had watched 12 student vlog video clips and were willing to participate in this research. They were chosen using purposive sampling method. The research results have shown that the researchers created 12 Student Vlog video clips for community communication through social lab with 3 communities near King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi. The team of creators consisted of the researchers and undergraduate students from the ETM 358 Marketing Communication course. The team analyzed, designed, developed, implemented and evaluated the video clips according to the ADDIE Model which consists of 5 steps. The team analyzed the data, designed the contents and developed 12 student vlog clips and then asked 3 experts in contents and 3 experts in media presentation to evaluate the quality of the video clips. It was found that the quality of contents was at a very good level ( \hat{x} = 4.61, S.D = 0.38) and that the quality of media presentation was at a very good level ( \hat{x}= 4.62, S.D = 0.43). Afterwards, the researchers distributed the student vlog clips on the ECT Vlog facebook page and assessed the perception of the sampling group. It was found that their perception was at a high level ( \hat{x} = 4.50, S.D = 0.58). The sampling group expressed a high level of satisfaction towards the student vlog (\hat{x} = 4.43, S.D = 0.67), confirming the research hypotheses. It can be concluded that the development of student vlog for community communication through social lab was of good quality and that it could be used in other contexts.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of European StudiesSame topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207