MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239463480 · doi:10.33423/jhetp.v20i8.3235

International Collaboration on a Sustainable Forest Management OER Online Program – A Case Study

2020· article· en· W4239463480 on OpenAlexaff
Min Qian Zeng, Hailan Chen, Anil Shrestha, Chris Crowley, Emma Ng, Guangyu Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Higher Education Theory and Practice · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumContext (archaeology)BusinessScale (ratio)Sustainable forest managementSustainable developmentCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Quality (philosophy)Environmental resource managementPublic relationsPolitical scienceForestryForest managementGeographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forestry education has always had to adapt to global changes and accommodate students and society's needs. To address the issues of the day, forestry education has cultivated human capacity to understand the complexity of ever-changing environments, master resource management technologies, and engage in global issues. Educational technology and online learning are important in providing flexible, accessible, and effective forest education at the rate and scale needed within the forestry sector. The transition during the COVID-19 pandemic further illustrates the role of online learning in worldwide education. In this context, this paper shares a case study from the Sustainable Forest Management Online Program led by the Faculty of Forestry, University of British Columbia (UBC) and Partner Universities. This study shows that appropriately integrating educational technologies into an internationally developed and recognized high-quality curriculum is an effective way to create accessible and affordable forestry education in meeting the demand of evolving societal and environmental conditions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.559
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.348 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Higher Education Theory and PracticeSame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207