MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308203266 · doi:10.1002/nse2.20092

“His lectures were like watching a show on Netflix”: A success story of laugh tracks in prerecorded undergraduate lessons

2022· article· en· W4308203266 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrés Varhola

Bibliographic record

VenueNatural sciences education · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCommunication in Education and Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsEntertainmentFace (sociological concept)LaughterValue (mathematics)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Style (visual arts)Online learningMultimediaAestheticsPsychologyVisual artsArtComputer scienceSociologySocial psychologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The onset of the COVID‐19 pandemic in 2020 put enormous pressure on educators to quickly adapt course materials for online delivery. In my case, a naturally humorous teaching style clashed with the arid world of computers in a virtual environment, leading me to believe in a reduced teaching effectiveness under such conditions, and that my students would suffer from countless hours of dull screentime. This article narrates the story of how a simple technique—adding laugh tracks to prerecorded videos in forestry undergraduate courses—was the foundation of a comprehensive approach to design online instruction with a high entertainment value. Several ideas to integrate humor in online (and face‐to‐face) learning are described based on these experiences and are accompanied by a brief theoretical background highlighting the value of bringing laughter to academic settings. Student feedback clearly indicated that the use of laugh tracks and other humorous elements was well received, especially during the challenging times of learning under lockdowns.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0090.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.385 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNatural sciences educationSame topicCommunication in Education and HealthcareFrench-language works237,207