MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3170579969 · doi:10.9734/ajess/2021/v17i430426

Perceptions of Students from Northwestern Romania on Online Education during the Pandemic COVID-19

2021· article· en· W3170579969 on OpenAlexaff
Bogdan-Vasile Cioruța, Marius Mesaroș, Monica Lauran, Mirela Coman, Alexandru Lauran

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Journal of Education and Social Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology-Enhanced Education Studies
Canadian institutionsScience North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfographicContext (archaeology)PandemicRomanianPsychologyPerceptionCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Sample (material)Medical educationAnonymityPedagogyMathematics educationGeographyMedicinePolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current spatio-temporal context, in which the didactic activities in our country (Romania) are still carried out, is, beyond its form of social experiment, a form devoid of spiritual content. In the transition from classical to modern, through multimedia technologies, the interactions based on the teaching-learning-assessment activity are severely widowed by the physical lack of those closely involved in the educational system. In such a context, considered to be still cloudy, unsettled, the level of perception of those trained is questioned. Thus, through this study, our emphasis and attention fall on how online education is received, accepted, or not among Romanian students; for the study being interviewed only the students from the third year of study, from various specializations (technical and non-technical), aged over 21-22 years. This study took place between November 2020 and February 2021, on a sample of 463 students. Only students with whom the teachers had contact, who actively participated in online courses, seminars, and laboratories (especially computer-assisted training seminars), participated and were interviewed. The whole debate focused on the students' report on the teaching activity carried out exclusively online. Their answers, under anonymity and voluntary commitment, being an overview, which we decided to present both descriptive (only fragments) and infographics (only a summary of answers).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.394 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Journal of Education and Social StudiesSame topicTechnology-Enhanced Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207