| 1. |
- Jandrić, Petar, et al.
(författare)
-
Teaching in the Age of Covid-19
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Postdigital Science and Education. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2524-4868 .- 2524-485X. ; 2:3, s. 1069-1230
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- A collection of 84 author's testimonies and workspace photographs between 18 March and 5 May 2020.
|
|
| 2. |
- Jandrić, Petar, et al.
(författare)
-
Teaching in the Age of Covid-19 : The New Normal
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Postdigital Science and Education. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2524-485X .- 2524-4868. ; 4:3, s. 877-1015
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- On 17 March 2020, Postdigital Science and Education launched a call for testimonies about teaching and learning during very frst Covid-19 lockdowns. The resulting article, ‘Teaching in the Age of Covid-19’ (attached), presents 81 written testimonies and 80 workspace photographs submitted by 84 authors from 19 countries. On 17 March 2021, Postdigital Science and Education launched a call for a sequel article of testimonies about teaching and learning during very first Covid-19 lockdowns. The resulting article, ‘Teaching in the Age of Covid-19—1 Year Later’(attached), consists of 74 textual testimonies and 76 workspace photographs submitted by 77 authors from 20 countries.These two articles have been downloaded almost 100,000 times and have been cited more than 100 times. This shows their value as historical documents. Recent analyses, such as ‘Teaching in the Age of Covid-19—A Longitudinal Study ’(attached), also indicate their strong potential for educational research. As the Covid-19 pandemic seems to wind down, pandemic experiences have entered the mainstream. They shape all educational research of today and arguably do not require special treatment. Yet, our unique series of pandemic testimonies provides a unique opportunity to longitudinally trace what happens to the same people over the years—and this opportunity should not be missed.Today, we launch a call for fnal sequel: Teaching in the Age of Covid-19—The New Normal. In this sequel, we would like to hear about ways in which you—contributors to the previous articles—have established your own new normal. We hope that this will be the last iteration in this series of testimony articles. Unless the world faces another strong pandemic outburst, we would like to end the series with this last article.
|
|
| 3. |
- Jandrić, Petar, et al.
(författare)
-
Teaching in the Age of Covid-19—1 Year Later
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Postdigital Science and Education. - : Springer. - 2524-485X .- 2524-4868. ; 3:3, s. 1073-1223
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 4. |
- Wang, Yan Ming, et al.
(författare)
-
Colorado geoid computation experiment : overview and summary
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of Geodesy. - : Springer. - 0949-7714 .- 1432-1394. ; 95:12
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The primary objective of the 1-cm geoid experiment in Colorado (USA) is to compare the numerous geoid computation methods used by different groups around the world. This is intended to lay the foundations for tuning computation methods to achieve the sought after 1-cm accuracy, and also evaluate how this accuracy may be robustly assessed. In this experiment, (quasi)geoid models were computed using the same input data provided by the US National Geodetic Survey (NGS), but using different methodologies. The rugged mountainous study area (730 km x 560 km) in Colorado was chosen so as to accentuate any differences between the methodologies, and to take advantage of newly collected GPS/leveling data of the Geoid Slope Validation Survey 2017 (GSVS17) which are now available to be used as an accurate and independent test dataset. Fourteen groups from fourteen countries submitted a gravimetric geoid and a quasigeoid model in a 1' x 1' grid for the study area, as well as geoid heights, height anomalies, and geopotential values at the 223 GSVS17 marks. This paper concentrates on the quasigeoid model comparison and evaluation, while the geopotential value investigations are presented as a separate paper (Sanchez et al. in J Geodesy 95(3):1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-021-01481-0, 2021). Three comparisons are performed: the area comparison to show the model precision, the comparison with the GSVS17 data to estimate the relative accuracy of the models, and the differential quasigeoid (slope) comparison with GSVS17 to assess the relative accuracy of the height anomalies at different baseline lengths. The results show that the precision of the 1' x 1' models over the complete area is about 2 cm, while the accuracy estimates along the GSVS17 profile range from 1.2 cm to 3.4 cm. Considering that the GSVS17 does not pass the roughest terrain, we estimate that the quasigeoid can be computed with an accuracy of similar to 2 cm in Colorado. The slope comparisons show that RMS values of the differences vary from 2 to 8 cm in all baseline lengths. Although the 2-cm precision and 2-cm relative accuracy have been estimated in such a rugged region, the experiment has not reached the 1-cm accuracy goal. At this point, the different accuracy estimates are not a proof of the superiority of one methodology over another because the model precision and accuracy of the GSVS17-derived height anomalies are at a similar level. It appears that the differences are not primarily caused by differences in theory, but that they originate mostly from numerical computations and/or data processing techniques. Consequently, recommendations to improve the model precision toward the 1-cm accuracy are also given in this paper.
|
|
