MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4233076037 · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v20i1.3998

Participation in Online Courses and Interaction With a Virtual Agent

2019· article· en· W4233076037 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Donggil Song, Marilyn Rice, Eun Young Oh

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConversationAsynchronous communicationComputer-mediated communicationQuality (philosophy)Online courseComputer scienceDistance educationEducational technologyIdentification (biology)Discussion boardLearning ManagementOnline discussionMathematics educationPsychologyWorld Wide WebThe InternetCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Online learning environments could be well understood as a multifaceted phenomenon affected by different aspects of learner participation including synchronous/asynchronous interactions. The aim of this study was to investigate learners’ participation in online courses, synchronous interaction with a conversational virtual agent, their relationships with learner performance, and the participation/interaction factor identification. To examine learner participation, we collected learning management system (LMS) log data that included the frequency and length of course access, discussion board postings, and final grades. To examine synchronous learner interaction, we collected learners’ conversation logs from the conversational agent. We calculated the quantity and quality of discussion postings and conversations with the agent. The results showed that the frequency and length of course access, the quantity and quality of discussion postings, and the quality of conversation with the agent were significantly associated with the learner achievement. This study also identified two factors that comprise online learning participation and interaction: interaction quality and LMS-oriented interaction.

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 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)0.004
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.534
Threshold uncertainty score0.247

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.504
Teacher spread0.410 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations75
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed LearningSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207