Symposium 3: What is it like for a learner to participate in a Zoom Breakout Room session?
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
Though virtual classrooms are not new, the COVID-19 pandemic sent many teachers and students online for the first time. This paper examines the use of a web-based video conferencing tool, Zoom, and in particular, the use of breakout rooms as part of a student’s learning experience. We ask: what is it like for a learner to participate in a Zoom Breakout Room session? Using Max van Manen’s (2016) phenomenology of practice, we collected learners’ lived experience descriptions of participating in a Zoom breakout room, then reflected on them phenomenologically as a way to generate new insights into this recently common online learning experience. Four moments are portrayed: a learner’s arrest at the announcement of breakout rooms; a learner’s transition into a breakout room as existential suspension; surveilling self and others in a breakout room; and exiting the breakout room as a moment of foreclosure and re-disorientation. The paper compares Zoom breakout rooms with aspects of video-gaming and notices a detriment to Freirean problem-posing education if students can avoid standing, unmediated, behind just their words, even in the relative safety of a small group of peers.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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