MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Designing Online Learning Communities

2022· book-chapter· en· W4299785437 on OpenAlex
Martha Cleveland‐Innes, J. Hawryluk

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

VenueHandbook of Open, Distance and Digital Education · 2022
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommunity of inquiryConstructivism (international relations)Social constructivismMetacognitionCollaborative learningLearning communityExperiential learningConstructivist teaching methodsLearning sciencesActive learning (machine learning)Mathematics educationCooperative learningPedagogyOnline learningSynchronous learningSocial learningProfessional learning communityPsychologyComputer scienceCognitionTeaching methodMultimediaArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Higher education course design is moving increasingly toward constructivist, collaborative approaches for higher-order learning. A community-based approach to learning fits both this type of pedagogy and preferred learning outcomes related to critical thinking and metacognition. This is particularly necessary when moving such learning online, and the need for a community is even more important for engagement and motivation than in-person learning, where community and connection is often created organically. Online learning communities can be effectively created using the community of inquiry theoretical framework, as it intentionally makes space for learners to express their teaching, social, and cognitive presences. To support the design of effective online learning experiences, how each presence fits into the constructivist and inquiry-based approaches is explained in this chapter. As well, applications are suggested. Finally, assessment approaches are provided that are in line with the tenets of constructivism, inquiry-based learning, and hence the community of inquiry.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.298 · 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