MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158725434 · doi:10.1145/366413.364619

Experiences with tutored video instruction for introductory programming courses

2001· article· en· W3158725434 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueACM SIGCSE Bulletin · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTeaching and Learning Programming
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbandonment (legal)Mathematics educationStudioQuarter (Canadian coin)Computer scienceCommunity collegeCourse (navigation)MultimediaMedical educationPsychologyEngineeringMedicinePolitical scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we describe our experiences of exporting our introductory programming courses to community colleges. We used Tutored Video Instruction (TVI) as the mode of instruction where recorded versions of our lectures were shown to groups of students with local instructors periodically stopping the lecture for questions and discussion. We have offered a total of 16 sections of TVI courses, 11 were of our first quarter programming course (CSE142), and 5 were of our second quarter programming course (CSE 143). The courses were offered at seven institutions. Approximately 180 students completed the courses.We identify factors which contributed positively and negatively to the use of TVI for introductory programming courses. The two most important changes to our TVI program based on these experiences will the use of studio produced lectures and the abandonment of centralized course administration.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.620

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.237 · 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