MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400482809 · doi:10.55016/ojs/cpai.v4i1.71348

Choose your own learning adventure

2021· article· en· W4400482809 on OpenAlexaff
E.D. Woodford

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Perspectives on Academic Integrity · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicOutdoor and Experiential Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdventurePsychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In higher education, is it necessary for every learner to take the same path through the course to complete the course? Detecting a number of plagiarism instances in a course resulted in the need to research and implement strategies to promote academic integrity. In a reflective study of teaching Indigenous Studies online over the past four years at two different institutions, this paper proposes how designing choices in online learning opportunities can promote academic integrity. Not without challenges, the constraints in implementation encountered over the fours years noted pre-designed online or continuous enrolment online courses where there is inability to personalize content or make revisions and difficulty building a relationship in order to personalize the course experience with larger online class sizes at some institutions and/or faculties.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.429
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.363
Teacher spread0.331 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Perspectives on Academic IntegritySame topicOutdoor and Experiential EducationFrench-language works237,207