MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319716104 · doi:10.58840/ots.v1i1.1

Canadian E-learning platform: Using Moodle for Course Creation

2022· article· en· W4319716104 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Legris Rohio

Bibliographic record

VenueOTS Canadian Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe InternetQuality (philosophy)E learningHigher educationVirtual learning environmentMathematics educationStatisticsKnowledge managementComputer sciencePsychologyWorld Wide WebPolitical scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The education sector is not really averse to emerging technology, including the Internet. Technology-Enhanced Learning has evolved into a field of study and practice centered on the use of information and communication technologies in teaching and learning. This research aimed to analysis the use of Moodle for course creation as E-learning platform at selected private institutions in Canada. The study took place at chosen private institutions in Canada. To support the research to evaluate use of Moodle for course creation as E-learning platform at private institutions, the researchers used four Moodle creation aspects, first instructors’ technology experience, second was university’s system quality, third was information quality and last was instructors ‘internet experience. The study used a survey to assess the current study using a quantitative analysis approach. The data was collected at random among 78 instructors from Canada's private institutions. The findings revealed that Instructors’ internet experience as the use of Moodle element has significant positive influence on course creation at 5% level. Furthermore, all beta value is higher than .001. All models have very high adjusted R2 (0.681, 0.627, 0.712, and 0.732 respectively) indicating the ability of the models explaining the variation of course creation due to variation of independent variables is very high. The F-value shows that the explanatory variables are jointly statistically significant in the model and the Durbin-Watson (DW) statistics reveals that there is autocorrelation in the models.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0080.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.290 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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 venueOTS Canadian JournalSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207