MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404674337 · doi:10.18357/otessac.2024.4.1.321

Power of Role Play and Imagination in Online Learning

2024· article· en· W4404674337 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lisa Hammershaimb

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Open/Technology in Education Society and Scholarship Association Conference · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPower (physics)ImaginationPsychologyAestheticsCognitive psychologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Asynchronous capstone courses often lack clear opportunities for students to gain confidence in applying skills they’ve learned throughout their program of study. To counteract this, I developed an HR capstone simulation course. Through the experience, I learned the power of low-tech role play to reinvigorate the online capstone experience. To accomplish this, the course author and I created Jade Stone, a fictional home décor and accessories company and the site of an eight-week simulation. Students entered the simulation as Jade Stone’s new HR manager and were required to solve increasingly complex issues. I leveraged my design background to make branding assets and emails, further immersing students. The course author and I developed engaging avatar videos, discussions, and assignments to prepare students for HR careers by integrating academic knowledge with real-world applications. Student feedback showed the continuity of story arc and practical application made this coursework highly engaging. Developing the simulation was intensely collaborative, requiring meticulous planning to seamlessly embed content without disrupting the fictional world. Though the course took much creative planning, it resulted in a delightful capstone experience that allowed students to gain confidence as they imagined themselves as HR managers.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.321
Threshold uncertainty score0.382

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Open/Technology in Education Society and Scholarship Association ConferenceSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207