MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4252879146 · doi:10.1080/01587919.2020.1821609

Educational distancing

2020· article· en· W4252879146 on OpenAlex

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

VenueDistance Education · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology-Enhanced Education Studies
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistance educationSocial distanceDistancingPremiseClosure (psychology)CurriculumPublic relationsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Political sciencePreparednessSociologyHigher educationPedagogyMedicineLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The spread of the coronavirus (COVID-19) is placing impossible demands on distance education. With the closure of schools and colleges, teachers are being given only weeks to put their courses online regardless of their lack of online experience and support facilities. In the United States of America, international students who fail to continue their studies online have been threatened with expulsion to their own countries, where online resources may be unavailable. The failure of institutions to place their curricula online efficiently will be a public relations disaster blamed not on those who have issued these impossible demands but on the false premise that distance education methods were ineffective all along. The article summarizes the problems facing teachers and students in this situation, and repeats a conclusion expressed by me in previous reflection articles: that the surest way to make online learning effective is to consult the decades of practical experience in the distance education literature.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.746
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.329 · 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