MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4233813336 · doi:10.21432/cjlt27924

Editorial

2020· editorial· fr· W4233813336 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Martha Cleveland‐Innes, Sawsen Lakhal

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Learning and Technology · 2020
Typeeditorial
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMathematics educationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We are, at last, able to publish the third issue of 2019 of CJLT.As with many things, the COVID-19 epidemic and the required response demanded much attention and activity.The resulting closure of schools and post-secondary education institutions created a draw on many of us involved in education delivery.Far from carefully designed online and blended teaching and learning, emergency remote teaching and learning did benefit from the support and direction from many in our field of learning with technology.We welcome those moving online as fellow colleagues; faculty, lecturers, instructors, instructional designers, and administrators in postsecondary and higher education and teachers and administrators in the K-12 system.We look forward to learning from the documentation and research about these new and unique experiences of educators.These outcomes of the Covid-19 experience, outcomes of alternative forms of education delivery in the emergent move to remote or distance delivery will be welcome.They will guide other educators in any situation where distance, online, technology-enabled and/or digital education delivery is needed or desired.We wish all involved the very best in this endeavour.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0080.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0670.053

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.323 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Learning and TechnologySame topicCOVID-19 and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207