An inquiry into educational technologists’ conceptions of their philosophies of teaching and technology / Enquête sur les conceptions philosophiques de l'enseignement et de la technologie élaborées par les technologues de l’éducation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been suggested that when we know our philosophy of teaching and technology we then have the ability to articulate not only what we are doing as educational technologists, but what we want to achieve with the technologies, and why. And while most educational technologists would agree that knowing our philosophical orientations is important, do educational technologists actually know, or can they accurately identify, their teaching and technology philosophical orientations? We sought to answer these questions by assessing the consistency between what educational technologists say in collegial deliberations and how they self-identify their philosophical orientations. The results of this exploratory study provide us with insights on how educational technologists construe their philosophical orientations of teaching and technology. Philosophies of teaching and technology are defined in this study as a conceptual framing that embodies certain values, attitudes and ideologies from which we view the multi-contextual facets of educational practice. Il a été suggéré que, lorsque nous avons conscience de notre philosophie de l'enseignement et de la technologie, nous sommes mieux en mesure d’exprimer non seulement ce que nous faisons en tant que technologues de l'éducation, mais aussi ce que nous cherchons à réaliser avec les technologies et pourquoi. Si les technologues de l'éducation admettent pour la plupart l’importance de connaître nos orientations philosophiques, connaissent-ils pour autant ou peuvent-ils identifier avec précision, leurs orientations philosophiques de l’enseignement et de la technologie? Nous avons cherché à répondre à ces questions en évaluant la cohérence entre ce qu’affirment les technologues de l'éducation en contexte de débat professionnel et la manière dont ils identifient eux-mêmes leurs propres orientations philosophiques. Les résultats de cette étude exploratoire nous donnent un aperçu de la façon dont les technologues de l'éducation interprètent leurs orientations philosophiques de l'enseignement et de la technologie. Les philosophies de l'enseignement et de la technologie sont définies dans cette étude comme un cadre conceptuel incarnant certaines valeurs, attitudes et idéologies à partir desquelles nous considérons les aspects multi-contextuels de la pratique éducative.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.061 | 0.056 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.077 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".