MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386800470 · doi:10.23977/aetp.2023.071006

Analysis of Classroom Teaching Process Data Based on Intelligent Teaching Evaluation System

2023· article· en· W4386800470 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wei Chong, Haichao Liu, Zhiguo Wang, Peng He, Yiqing Wang, Shiming Li, Kunyao Shu, Yuping Tong, Jianhua Zhang, Lianhai Cao

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Educational Technology and Psychology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Technology and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Graduate EducationNorth China University of Water Resources and Electric Power
KeywordsComputer scienceThe InternetClass (philosophy)Process (computing)Big dataTeaching methodMultimediaOnline teachingTeaching and learning centerMobile deviceMathematics educationWorld Wide WebArtificial intelligencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Education big data analysis is currently a hot topic of concern in academia. Building on the "Internet + Education" concept, this paper developed a mobile information technology teaching evaluation tool based on WeChat, called the "Intelligent Teaching Evaluation System (ITES)", making it possible for instructors to adopt a hybrid teaching method that combines online and offline teaching by fully utilizing the advantages of mobile internet technology combined with face-to-face teaching. This approach can stimulate students' classroom participation and foster their interest in self-directed learning using mobile devices. The system achieves breakthroughs in university teaching management, homework evaluation and statistics, and post-class Q&A and discussions. At the same time, all teaching-related data can be collected and analyzed to help instructors find the most effective educational methods and strategies to improve teaching effectiveness.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.488
Threshold uncertainty score0.591

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.400 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Educational Technology and PsychologySame topicEducational Technology and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207