MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401873616 · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v25i3.8070

Special Issue: Artificial Intelligence in Open and Distributed Learning: Does It Facilitate or Hinder Teaching and Learning?

2024· article· en· W4401873616 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ehsan Namaziandost, Afsheen Rezai

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpen learningComputer scienceEducational technologyDistance educationSynchronous learningMathematics educationTeaching methodMultimediaCooperative learningPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a rapidly evolving field with the potential to revolutionize various aspects of education, especially in open and distributed learning, including distance education, hybrid learning, and blended learning.AI can transform curriculum design, content delivery, assessment, feedback, learner support, and learning analytics (Chen et al., 2020).AI offers personalized and adaptive learning paths based on learners' preferences, needs, goals, and performance, enhancing their educational experience (Holmes et al., 2023).It also provides timely feedback and guidance, fostering engagement and motivation.AI creates interactive and immersive learning environments, such as games, simulations, and virtual reality, sparking learners' interest and involvement.It promotes social and collaborative learning by facilitating communication and cooperation among learners, instructors, and resources (Holmes et al., 2023).Additionally, AI optimizes various tasks like content creation, grading, assessment, and learning analytics, improving the quality and efficiency of education processes.However, AI in education also raises significant challenges and risks.Ethical, legal, social, pedagogical, and technical issues need consideration (Chen et al., 2022;Ouyang & Jiao, 2021).For example, maintaining AI applications' quality, validity, reliability, and fairness remains crucial.Protecting learners' and instructors' privacy, security, and autonomy in AImediated learning contexts is also vital (Holmes et al., 2023).Moreover, fostering critical thinking, creativity, and human values in AI-enhanced learning experiences is crucial.Lastly, addressing the digital divide and potential marginalization of learners and instructors without access to or skills in AI technologies is paramount (Holmes et al., 2023).Overall, AI has immense potential in education, but its responsible and informed implementation is necessary to ensure its benefits are maximized while mitigating potential risks.Given the above points, this special issue aims to explore the opportunities and challenges of AI in open and distributed learning, including distance education, hybrid learning, and blended learning, from multiple perspectives.We invited original research articles that address the following topics but were not limited to:

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)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.362

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0120.008
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0130.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1080.032

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations17
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed LearningSame topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207