Emergency remote assessment practices in higher education in sub-Saharan Africa during COVID-19
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following the disruptions to in-person schooling during COVID-19 and the need for emergency remote teaching, this study explored the assessment experiences of teacher educators in Ghana. Through a qualitative transcendental phenomenological approach, purposive criterion sampling was used to select 25 teacher educators from 15 teacher training institutions in Ghana who participated in online teaching during COVID-19 school closure. The findings show that teacher-centered approaches to assessment dominate emergency remote assessment practices of teacher educators. Hodgepodge grading and general feedback were more prevalent during remote assessment. Teachers were also found to randomly select a few students to provide individualized feedback due to the large class size. Challenges including limited knowledge of the use of the online teaching platform for assessment, inadequate professional training and access to technological resources, and concerns about academic dishonesty were reported. However, teachers reported that their involvement in abrupt remote teaching and assessment has been a learning opportunity for them to develop new skills, which is imperative for their professional development.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it