MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410564323 · doi:10.5539/jel.v14n5p239

Metaverse Enhancing Vocational Skills of Digital Media Education in Chinese Higher Vocational Institutions

2025· article· en· W4410564323 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wannaporn Siripala

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducation and Learning Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVocational educationMathematics educationHigher educationPsychologyPedagogySociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores the impact of metaverse on vocational skills training in higher vocational education in my country, focusing on practical experience, professional knowledge, innovation ability, and technical proficiency and assessing the level of students using metaverse to improve technical and vocational skills. The research subjects are students in the audio-visual language course of the digital media art design major at Fuzhou Software Vocational and Technical College. A quantitative research method was adopted, using teaching plans, pre-test and post-tests, questionnaires, and other tools, and a total of 54 valid questionnaires were collected. The results showed a high level: (1) The impact of metaverseon vocational skills training in higher vocational education, focusing on practical experience, professional knowledge, innovation ability, and technical proficiency. (2) Vocation skill after learning by metaversehigher than before learning by metaverse technology. (3) Students who learn metaverse had to qualify the student’s feedback level high. Metaversefosters an interactive learning approach, enhancing vocational skills, transforming educational models, and supporting teaching reform while laying the groundwork for its broader application in vocational education through curriculum innovation.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.637
Threshold uncertainty score0.683

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.323 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicEducation and Learning InterventionsFrench-language works237,207