MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4241391526 · doi:10.1111/bjet.12260_2

Hokanson, Brad & Gibbons, Andrew ed (2013) Design in educational technologySpringer (Berlin) isbn 978‐3‐319‐00926‐1 283 pp £90 http://www.springer.com/education+%26+language/learning+%26+instruction/book/978‐3‐319‐00926‐1

2015· article· en· W4241391526 on OpenAlex
Diane P. Janes

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Educational Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInnovative Educational Technologies
Canadian institutionsCape Breton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLearning designSociologyField (mathematics)Media studiesLibrary scienceMathematics educationComputer sciencePsychologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Here is a well written and well edited book with focus on the concept of design in modern educational technology practice. It is for both new and experienced designers; those new to the field might find opportunities to expand their practice, while experienced designers will find affirmation of many past practices and the opportunity to explore new ideas for future projects. If you think this book is likely to be of value to you, I suggest you buy your own copy Diane P Janes

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.284
Teacher spread0.263 · 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