MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402287524 · doi:10.14742/apubs.2012.1580

Using technology to encourage self-directed learning

2012· article· en· W4402287524 on OpenAlexaff
Shane Dawson, Leah P. Macfadyen, Evan F. Risko, Tom Foulsham, Alan Kingstone

Bibliographic record

VenueASCILITE Publications · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutodidacticismComputer sciencePsychologyMathematics education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapidly-developing 21st century world of work and knowledge calls for self-directed lifelong (SDL) learners. While higher education must embrace the types of pedagogies that foster SDL skills in graduates, the pace of change in education can be glacial. This paper describes a social annotation technology, the Collaborative Lecture Annotation System (CLAS), that can be used to leverage existing teaching and learning practices for acquisition of 21st Century SDL skills. CLAS was designed to build upon the artifacts of traditional didactic modes of teaching, create enriched opportunities for student engagement with peers and learning materials, and offer learners greater control and ownership of their individual learning strategies. Adoption of CLAS creates educational experiences that promote and foster SDL skills: motivation, self-management and self-monitoring. In addition, CLAS incorporates a suite of learning analytics for learners to evaluate their progress, and allow instructors to monitor the development of SDL skills and identify the need for learning support and guidance. CLAS stands as an example of a simple tool that can bridge the gap between traditional transmissive pedagogy and the creation of authentic and collaborative learning spaces.

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)0.018
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.005

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.380 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations10
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueASCILITE PublicationsSame topicInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207