MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1598306304

FEN ÖĞRETİMİ PROGRAMLARINDAKİ ETKİNLİKLERİN RUBRİK KULLANILARAK BİLİMİN DOĞASI AÇISINDAN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

2010· article· tr· W1598306304 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDergiPark (Istanbul University) · 2010
Typearticle
Languagetr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Leadership and Administration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bu çalışma, fen-teknoloji ve kimya öğretimi programlarındaki öğrenme-öğretme etkinliklerinin bilimin doğasını içerme düzeylerini ve niteliklerini belirlemek amacıyla yapılmıştır. Bu amaca yönelik olarak 2004 yılında Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı Tarafından geliştirilen ilköğretim Fen ve Teknoloji dersi öğretim programı ve Canada'nın; Ontario, Atlantic ve British Colombia eyaletlerinin ortaöğretim kimya dersi öğretim programlarındaki etkinlikler incelenmiştir. Programları incelemek için bilimin doğası boyutları dikkate alınarak analitik bir rubrik geliştirilmiş ve kullanılmıştır. Rubrik değerlendirmesi sonucunda Türkiye 'deki Fen ve Teknoloji Dersi Öğretim Programı ile British Colombia Kimya Dersi Öğretim Programlarındaki etkinliklerde bilimin doğasına oldukça yüksek oranda yer verildiği görülmüştür.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.247 · 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