MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400841422 · doi:10.55248/gengpi.5.0724.1809

Navigating the Digital Classroom: A Comparative Analysis of Educator and Learner Experiences in the Transition to E-Learning

2024· article· en· W4400841422 on OpenAlexaff
Raspal Kaur, Nirumala Rothinam

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Research Publication and Reviews · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsQuest University Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransition (genetics)Mathematics educationPedagogyPsychologyDigital learningMultimediaComputer scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the perceptions of educators and learners at a private university regarding the transition to e-learning during the COVID-19 pandemic.Using a quantitative approach, a questionnaire survey was conducted with 6 educators and 47 students.The study aimed to identify online platforms and tools used, challenges faced, and educators' experiences in adapting to e-learning.Results show that the Learning Management System was the primary tool used, followed by WhatsApp.Educators reported positive experiences in adapting their teaching methods but faced challenges like increased workload and lack of incentives.Students reported technical issues, heavier workloads, and difficulties with practical courses as major challenges.The study provides insights into the e-learning transition experience and offers recommendations for improving online teaching and learning practices.These findings can guide educational institutions in enhancing their e-learning strategies and support mechanisms for both educators and learners.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.529
Teacher spread0.405 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Research Publication and ReviewsSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207