MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386846600 · doi:10.23977/aetp.2023.071201

Analysis of Several Problems of Modern Distance Education in Colleges and Universities—Take Chongqing as an Example

2023· article· en· W4386846600 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wan Yanshan

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Educational Technology and Psychology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Technology and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistance educationPaceShadow (psychology)Quality (philosophy)Mathematics educationProcess (computing)Higher educationSociologyMedical educationPsychologyComputer scienceEconomic growthMedicineGeographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the development of science and technology, distance education has gradually attracted people's attention. At present, a large number of use scenarios of distance education have appeared in the society, and many colleges and universities also regard distance education as a means of universal education. Distance education can accelerate the pace of education and facilitate the teaching activities in different people. However, there are also many problems in the process of use, especially the concern about the quality of teaching has become an indelible shadow in the hearts of many people's minds. Therefore, this paper will analyze the problems existing in the objective and subjective distance education for the current scenarios used in distance education, and give reasonable suggestions. In previous studies, many people mainly attributed the teaching quality of distance education to the subjective reasons, rather than objectively discussing the objective factors of distance education on the teaching quality of enterprises. Therefore, this paper will focus on the evaluation of teaching quality from the objective and subjective perspectives.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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