Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ulfah MarifahThe blended and online learning ecosystem is a complex multistakeholder environment.Not until the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic hit did technology-enabled education become an integral feature of many higher educational systems, including Canada's.Its scope has expanded massively and rapidly in recent years, and as a result, research priorities in this emerging field must also adapt.While the needs and conditions in societies where the research is taking place are critical, true knowledge about pertinent factors is rarely readily available (Holmberg, 2005).The Finest Blend fills the gap by delving further into the research and practice of blended and online learning in Canadian higher education and introduces the reader to the complexities of transitioning into technology-mediated instructional designs and practices.To set the stage for the rest of the book, Michael Power (in Chapter 1) provides a historical review of how the traditional way of university class delivery and pedagogic practice through voice and text-based methods that are largely used in distance learning have intersected with evolving media and technology.Power uses the pendulum swing as a metaphor to denote open universities' efforts to facilitate graduatelevel best practices in online and hybrid learning in the wake of technology advances and shortcomings.In the second chapter, Jay Wilson reflects on his autoethnographic research of a faculty member mentorship program and proposes a systematic approach to assisting professors in using technology and demonstrating how to apply frameworks throughout course preparation.Employing design-based research (DBR), Jennifer Lock and her colleagues (Chapter 3) investigate the instructional design of online orientation and its impact on students' readiness for learning online.They stress the instructor's critical role in allowing intentionality and flexibility for students with any skill sets to begin their online learning journeys, the requirement for orientation programs to reflect the real academic online environment, and the program designs from student perspectives to establish the required supports for students to build the capacities essential for success in an online learning environment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.006 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".