MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381856832 · doi:10.13001/jtilt.v2i1.7663

Writing Effective Alt-text for Online Instructional Materials

2023· article· en· W4381856832 on OpenAlex

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

VenueJournal of Technology-Integrated Lessons and Teaching · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicText Readability and Simplification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceChecklistContext (archaeology)Space (punctuation)MultimediaPsychologyCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Instructional materials are increasingly created and made available within an online space. Engaging materials utilize various types of images to break up walls of text and enhance learning. Describing these images with effective alternative text (alt-text) is subjective and contextually-based, requiring a treatment and knowledge beyond a simple checklist. This lesson is aimed to support educators in becoming more accessibility-literate, and to build in robust alt-text at the moment of creation. This lesson presents five different types of images. Each image type serves a distinct purpose within the context of online instructional materials. During the lesson, learners will work through each image type, with opportunities to practice examining HTML alternative tags and writing appropriate alt-text for each type of image.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.743
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.288 · 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