MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3128847954 · doi:10.36834/cmej.71075

Six ways to get a grip on leveraging the expertise of Instructional Design and Technology professionals

2021· article· en· W3128847954 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Weichao Chen, A.J. Kleinheksel

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Education Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomedical and Engineering Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)HumanitiesKnowledge managementPsychologyEngineering ethicsSociologyPedagogyPolitical scienceEngineeringComputer sciencePhilosophyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We underutilize the knowledge and skills of Instructional Design and Technology (IDT) professionals, despite the frequent challenges in implementing learning technologies in medical education. This is largely due to a lack of understanding among stakeholders regarding the expertise of IDT professionals and their role in technology implementation processes. We seek to improve technology implementation outcomes by explaining the IDT field's foundational tenets of a systems perspective and disciplined approach, clarifying the role that IDT professionals can play in educational technology initiatives, and providing guidance on how to foster productive collaborations in pursuit of effective technology-enhanced learning.

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 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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Education JournalSame topicBiomedical and Engineering EducationFrench-language works237,207