MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404658978 · doi:10.18357/otessac.2023.3.1.162

Designing Group Work in Online Courses to Develop Preservice Teachers’ Professional Collaboration Skills

2024· article· en· W4404658978 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Amber Hartwell, Christy Thomas, Barbara Brown, Bruna Nogueria

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Open/Technology in Education Society and Scholarship Association Conference · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsAmbrose UniversityUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical educationPsychologyProfessional developmentWork (physics)Group workPedagogyMathematics educationEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With post-secondary institutions increasing offerings of online courses, there is much to learn about how online group work is designed. This is of particular importance for professional certification courses where group work is used to develop skills needed to prepare students for their chosen field, such as K-12 education. As part of case study research, the authors synthesize findings collected from both instructors and students at Western Canadian post-secondary institutions offering online courses in their Bachelor of Education degree pathways. Seeking to understand how group work can be designed to build essential professional skills required in the teaching profession through online course delivery, data was collected through one online survey, semi-structured interviews, and course documents. Findings suggest four design considerations for online group work: (1) clearly articulate the purpose of group work, (2) provide learner support through teaching presence, (3) be intentional in how groups are established, and (4) leverage digital tools for collaboration. The results will serve to benefit faculty, students and educational policy makers in understanding how group learning in online courses can be designed to develop critical professional skills. This will particularly benefit post-secondary institutions providing online courses in professional fields.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.210
Threshold uncertainty score0.859

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.384 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Open/Technology in Education Society and Scholarship Association ConferenceSame topicInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207