MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387524632 · doi:10.18162/ritpu-2023-v20n2-07

Moving Forward After COVID-19: New Directions for Teaching and Course Design in Higher Education

2023· article· en· W4387524632 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Nadia Naffi, Ann-Louise Davidson, Laura R. Winer, Brian Beatty, Aline Germain‐Rutherford, Rula L. Diab, Teresa Focarile, Danny Rukavina, David Hornsby, Shantell Strickland-Davis, Saouma BouJaoude, Stéphanie Côté, Geneviève Raîche-Savoie, Jean‐François Racine, Louis Camara, Nathalie Duponsel, Valentine Kropf

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Practises and Engagement
Canadian institutionsUniversité TÉLUQCarleton UniversityMcGill UniversityConcordia UniversityUniversity of OttawaUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Course (navigation)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakMathematics educationComputer sciencePsychologyVirologyMedicineEngineeringAerospace engineeringInternal medicineOutbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study identifies course design practices and evaluation strategies that promote high-quality, equitable, and inclusive education in hybrid or online modalities, and that consider student wellbeing and mental health, for the post-pandemic era. Our data set consisted of an integrative literature review, interviews with instructors, and focus groups with teaching and learning centre representatives from five countries: Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Lebanon. The study informs instructors' professional development, recommends concrete course design elements that promote equitable education, and shares innovative pedagogical practices for digital contexts.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score0.464

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaireSame topicHigher Education Practises and EngagementFrench-language works237,207