MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200104337 · doi:10.32370/ia_2021_12_18

Blended Learning: Features of Application in the Modern Educational System

2021· article· en· W4200104337 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Galina Bevzo, Vanda Vyshkivska, Iryna Titarenko, Anzhelika Remnova

Bibliographic record

VenueIntellectual Archive · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Innovations and Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlended learningComputer scienceProcess (computing)PersonalizationAdaptation (eye)Learning objectEducational technologyQuality (philosophy)Knowledge managementSynchronous learningSet (abstract data type)Mathematics educationCooperative learningTeaching methodArtificial intelligenceWorld Wide WebPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article analyzes the potential and possibilities of the method of blended learning as a didactic means of implementing the transition from the traditional model of learning to the integrated one with involving electronic environments and resources. The existing models of blended learning are considered, the ways of their adaptation to the conditions of studying at institutions of higher education are discussed. It will help to improve the quality of education as well as to provide opportunities for the implementing various educational models, forms and means of education. It is pointed out the problems which hinder the effective and rapid integration of e-learning environments. Some strategic initiatives to solve them are proposed. It is proved that blended learning technology involves the transformation of the student's position from the object to the active subject of teaching, and the teacher - from the main source of knowledge to the organizer of the students` learning process. Blended learning is justified as an educational model which bases on the integration of traditional face-to-face and electronic education systems and provides personalization of the learning process by means of providing the learners with the opportunity to choose conditions and control over the process of mastering the set of necessary competencies.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntellectual ArchiveSame topicEducational Innovations and ChallengesFrench-language works237,207