Teaching, Fast and Slow: Student Perceptions of Emergency Remote Education
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research explores emergency remote education, defined as a rapid, system-wide pivot to remote education in response to emergencies that disrupt normal institutional processes. To do so, we explore student perceptions of the successes and failures of the pivot to online learning at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. A mixed-methods survey was distributed to a large sample of university students to explore satisfaction, challenges, opportunities, and instructional needs. Results highlight the importance of faculty hard skills (e.g., technical skills) and soft skills (e.g., compassion), although soft skills were noted more frequently, suggesting that soft skills may be critically important in the context of emergency remote education. Results also reveal that online education in general suffers from a perception as being inherently lower quality than in-person education, and highlight the importance of providing faculty with proper training and support to set them up for success. Based on these results, we provide a number of suggestions for approaching the development, delivery, and support of emergency education and online marketing education in the future.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it