MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391709429 · doi:10.6007/ijarbss/v14-i1/20437

The Relationship of Web-Based Learning among Academic Staff in TVET Institutions

2024· article· en· W4391709429 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Habsah Mohammad Sabli, Mohammad Fardillah Bin Wahi, Sari Lestari Zainal Ridho, Dayang Hummida Binti Abang Abdul Rahman

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology-Enhanced Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSample (material)Medical educationThe InternetKnowledge managementPsychologyQuarter (Canadian coin)UsabilityAcademic institutionComputer scienceWorld Wide WebMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of web applications at Polytechnic Mukah Sarawak (PMU) involves not only teaching and learning but also the management of the institution. MS Team is fully utilized during COVID-19 among staff and students to facilitate discussion, teaching, and learning sessions. Nonetheless, one of the difficulties that academics and students encounter is internet networking. MS Teams are still used by staff where internal and foreign meetings are held. As a result, this study is being conducted to investigate the relationships between the factors that impact the adoption of Microsoft Teams among PMU instructors. Data were collected in the first quarter of 2022 using a purposive sample approach, and 103 respondents satisfied the study's requirements. The partial Least Squares Structural Modelling approach was used to analyse the data. According to the data processing results, Facilitating Conditions (FC) and Perceived Ease of Usage (PEOU) were significant and had a good influence on the adoption of MS Team among PMU instructors. The implications of these findings are that MS Teams should be improved and maintained for facilitating teaching and learning, meetings, and others.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.320
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.275
GPT teacher head0.540
Teacher spread0.265 · 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.

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social SciencesSame topicTechnology-Enhanced Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207