MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203270266 · doi:10.5539/hes.v11n4p48

Teaching Ηigher Εducation Pedagogy in a Department of Εducation: Αn Assessment Based on Students’ Views and Opinions

2021· article· en· W3203270266 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumHigher educationRelevance (law)Medical educationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Curriculum developmentPsychologyPedagogyMathematics educationMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article we present the results of a pilot implementation of a course in Higher Education Pedagogy in a Department of Education in Greece. Our goal is to investigate whether a similar course may be introduced into the undergraduate curriculum of a Department of Education. The course was taught according to remote flipped classroom approach, whereas the assessment is based on the views and opinions of the students who attended the course during the academic year 2020-2021, i.e., during the COVID-19 pandemic period. According to the findings of the research, the course achieved a particularly high evaluation degree regarding the interest it attracted, the usefulness and its relevance to the other courses of the curriculum of a Department of Education, while its introduction in a curriculum of this type produces additional benefits, both for the development of the students and for the field of HEP.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.390
Threshold uncertainty score0.588

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.592
Teacher spread0.409 · 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