Podcasting in Higher Education: Learning Experiences in Face-to-Face and Blended Modalities
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents the results of an interdisciplinary innovation project entitled Podcasting in Higher Education Teaching and Learning. The project was implemented across different subjects and degree programmes at the University of Vic – Central University of Catalonia during the 2021–2022 academic year, using both face-to-face and blended learning modalities in three faculties. The project’s objectives are twofold: firstly, to integrate podcasting as a teaching and learning tool in university environments, and secondly, to conduct a pilot test of its interdisciplinary application for future use in various subjects and university programmes. The study explores podcasting as a learning tool to enhance communication skills across various scientific disciplines at the university level. The results indicate high participant satisfaction, affirming the effectiveness of podcasting in higher education, driven by factors such as innovation, autonomy, creativity and new educational paradigms. However, challenges in implementation and significant variations across degree programmes are noted. The project also highlights the importance of raising awareness within the university community about the role of communication in the dissemination of scientific knowledge.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it