MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1601093437

Innovations in Teacher Development for the Knowledge Age

2005· article· en· W1601093437 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mary Lamon, Thérèse Laferrière, Paul Resta, Di Wu, M. Prevanas, Michael Barber

Bibliographic record

VenueThe HKU Scholars Hub (University of Hong Kong) · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Technology Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelevance (law)Context (archaeology)PedagogyTeacher educationSociologyMathematics educationKnowledge managementPublic relationsPolitical sciencePsychologyComputer scienceGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lamon is a senior research scientist with the Institute for Knowledge Innovation and Technology (IKIT) and the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto. She has been with IKIT since 1996 where she was involved in the Canadian Telelearning National Centres of Excellence program designed to research information and communications technology development in K-12 education. Previously, Lamon directed the international Schools for Thought program, that integrated cognitive research from OISE/UT, Vanderbilt University and the University of California at Berkeley.
\n
\nLamon received a PhD in experimental cognitive psychology from the University of Toronto. Her research as a McDonnell post-doctoral fellow led to research in elementary classrooms where students in CSILE classrooms were encouraged to become self-directed, intentional and reflective learners. Lamon is currently researching the evolution of knowledge building communities, the development of teacher expertise, and on how knowledge building & the creation of improvable artifacts increase literacy as a by-product. She is also working on Scardamalia's “Beyond Best Practice” initiative designed to study and promote innovation across sectors, ages and countries.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.689
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe HKU Scholars Hub (University of Hong Kong)Same topicEducation and Technology IntegrationFrench-language works237,207