MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400507781 · doi:10.54337/nlc.v14i1.8003

Beyond conventional teaching towards networked learning

2024· article· en· W4400507781 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Conference on Networked Learning · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNetworked learningComputer scienceMathematics educationPsychologyMultimediaEducational technology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) adoption growing, education has seen the emergence of innovative technologies like chatbots. However, little research has examined the impacts of GenAI integration in specialized higher education contexts. This study explored graduate students’ experiences using a GenAI chatbot, PEARL, within a graduate-level teacher education course focused on teaching students how to collaboratively conduct program evaluations using practice cases. Four students participated in our study and shared perceptions of interviewing personas with PEARL when evaluating the practice cases. Thematic analysis identified advantages like enhanced efficiency and accessibility, plus limitations regarding authenticity of artificial interactions. Findings emphasized the continued importance of human guidance and peer learning to enrich GenAI-enabled education aligning with principles of networked learning. Students highlighted the need for ethical considerations despite interacting with artificial entities, underscoring nuanced understanding. The significance of collaborative analysis and ongoing iterative improvements also emerged as themes integral to meaningful learning. Although GenAI presents transformational potential in instructional designs, findings support the use of blended approaches that strategically integrate its advantages with human activity and collaborative inquiry. The study makes contributions by elucidating domain-specific nuances of integrating GenAI into teaching in higher education. Practical implications encourage scaffolding GenAI curricula to promote authenticity and collaborative knowledge construction. Further research could examine variations across disciplines, technologies, and demographics. Overall, as GenAI shapes academia’s evolution, reflective pedagogical examination will be key to evidence-guided integration. This exploratory study presents a preliminary yet important step, unveiling opportunities for networked learning and complexities of GenAI adoption in teaching program evaluation skills in education 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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.298 · 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