MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4403817558 · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v25i4.7772

Navigating Challenges in Remote Speaking Tasks: Unveiling Technical and Non-Technical Problems Faced by Students

2024· article· en· W4403817558 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ahmad Tauchid, Khoirul Wafa

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi
KeywordsComputer scienceDistance educationEducational technologyComputer-mediated communicationMultimediaMathematics educationHuman–computer interactionWorld Wide WebPsychologyThe Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In today’s digitally driven era marked by widespread remote communication, individuals grapple with diverse challenges when undertaking speaking tasks from a distance. Despite extensive research on communication dynamics in virtual contexts, the specific hurdles associated with remote speaking tasks remain understudied. This research addresses this gap by qualitatively exploring the complexities of such challenges and proposing practical strategies for effective communication in virtual environments. Employing a qualitative research approach, a survey with open-ended questions was administered to 19 students in the English Education program, and NVivo 12 was used for analysis. The findings highlight technical and non-technical challenges in remote speaking tasks, emphasizing the critical role of digital proficiency and a stable technical infrastructure. The study underscores the need to address personal and social aspects, suggesting solutions that encompass a precise and adaptive approach, including ensuring a reliable Internet connection, strategic use of digital resources, enhancement of technical skills, and a holistic strategy to tackle both technical and non-technical challenges. This research implies that educators should prioritize developing students’ digital proficiency and adopt a comprehensive approach that tackles both technical and psychological challenges, aiming to boost confidence and interpersonal skills in virtual learning environments.

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)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.406 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning→Same topicOnline and Blended Learning→French-language works237,207→