MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386973035 · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-38129-4_11

Navigating Digital Environments One Step at a Time During COVID-19

2023· book-chapter· en· W4386973035 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Abhishek Bhati, Esther Fink

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAthabasca University
KeywordsBlended learningCollaborative learningConstructiveDigital learningPedagogyEducational technologySociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

COVID-19 pandemic turned the world upside down in many ways and forced universities worldwide to reconsider established practices. As an Asia-Pacific institution with research, learning and teaching activities across two countries, James Cook University (JCU) Singapore was no stranger to digital learning and had well-established, blended-learning policies (JCU, Blended learning design cycle, https://www.jcu.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/227866/JCU-Blended-Learning-Guide-2015.pdf , 2014) in place, based on constructive alignment of learning objectives, teaching methods, and assessment. This retrospective chapter examines the impact of the pandemic on learning and teaching and discusses how the experience shaped student-centric digital environment where students are actively engaged in reflecting on their learning as well as in the construction of knowledge—the impact on academic culture, social activities, collaborative efforts, and professional learning, both in and out of the classroom. Our considerations for quality digital learning design are informed by collaborative constructivism. and collective learning. From the institution’s reflective approach to crisis management emerged new processes and standards for digital learning that present opportunities for holistic digital transformation in Higher Education (HE) to policy makers and faculty.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0100.011
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designObservational
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 topicOnline and Blended Learning→French-language works237,207→