MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1498190448 · doi:10.21432/t2sg67

Barriers to Systemic, Effective, and Sustainable Technology Use in High School Classrooms / Obstacles a l’utilisation systemique, efficace et durable de la technologie dans les salles de classe des ecoles secondaires

2014· article· en· W1498190448 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jason Daniels, Michele Jacobsen, Stanley Varnhagen, Sharon Friesen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Learning and Technology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Technology Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeverage (statistics)SustainabilitySociologyPedagogyPolitical scienceLibrary sciencePsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of the Technology and High School Success (THSS) initiative was to encourage innovative strategies focused on improving provincial high school completion rates, using technology and student-centered learning to engage student interest. The primary purpose of this paper is to report on barriers that impede systemic, effective and sustainable technology integration within schools. Even with teacher and administrative support and commitment for THSS, evaluative research indicated minimal change in system capacity as a result of the initiative. Three primary barriers to program sustainability were: 1) schools and school districts did not leverage the opportunity to revisit their existing vision(s), 2) schools and school districts did not use data to make changes, and 3) limited access to technology. Le but de l’initiative « Technology and High School Success (THSS) » était d'encourager des stratégies novatrices visant à améliorer le taux d’achèvement des études secondaires dans la province de l’Alberta en utilisant la technologie et un apprentissage centré sur l'élève afin de susciter l'intérêt des élèves. L'objectif principal de cet article est de rendre compte des obstacles entravant l'intégration systémique, efficace et durable de la technologie dans les écoles. La recherche évaluative a révélé des changements minimes dans la capacité systémique à la suite de l'initiative, et ce, malgré l’appui et l’engagement des enseignants et des administrateurs envers le THSS. Les trois obstacles principaux à la viabilité du programme sont les suivants: 1) les écoles et les districts scolaires n'ont pas profité de l’occasion pour revoir leur(s) vision(s), 2) les écoles et les districts scolaires n'ont pas utilisé les données pour effectuer des changements, et 3) l'accès limité à la technologie.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.299
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations14
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Learning and TechnologySame topicEducation and Technology IntegrationFrench-language works237,207