MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312043075 · doi:10.29173/ijll19

Completing a doctoral dissertation during a global pandemic: Lessons learned.

2022· article· en· W4312043075 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Larry A. Couture

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Leadership in Learning · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPacePandemicHindsight biasPublic relationsMedical educationInterviewHappeningPolitical scienceWork (physics)PsychologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)EngineeringMedicineHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In March 2020, when the World Health Organization declared a global health emergency, I was a doctoral student at the University of Calgary. I was about three-quarters of the way through the program and was in the early stages of data gathering for my dissertation. The interruption to my studies was sudden and abrupt.
 Fortunately, I was able to continue interviewing research participants after a six week pause, but in a manner dramatically different than planned. I was also able to lean heavily on technology to adapt to the new conditions. The topic of my dissertation was collecting faculty perceptions of the need and urgency for change in the publicly funded postsecondary education system. Ironically, my participants identified technology as a major force of change in their paradigm as well.
 While completing the writing of my dissertation, the results of my data analysis and new literature being published magnified the strength of my findings. In hindsight, I realize that the timing of my work bridged the pre and post-pandemic environments. It also happening in real time, at a pace that might be unprecedented.
 While the pandemic cannot be declared over, it has already become clear that the nature of academic research has been irrevocably altered and that the publicly funded post-secondary education system has been similarly impacted. The results of my research provide a clear view of some of those changing conditions and allows us to project some perceptions of the future of the system.

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 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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.321
Threshold uncertainty score0.656

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.243
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Leadership in LearningSame topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207