iPads on Practicum: Perspective of a Student-Teacher
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Educators are embracing technology as a key to transforming learning for the 21st century. As the 21st century learning movement emphasizes the development of skills that are seen as uniquely relevant to the modern world, in the educational community, many are looking to technology, such as tablets, as a tool to modernizing classrooms. This research presents a case study of a participatory action research project, where participants provide input into the research process, examining the experiences of a secondary education level student-teacher implementing iPads during practicum. For two weeks, the student teacher integrated a set of 22 iPads into a grade ten Media Literacy unit. Qualitative data from the teacher’s daily blog and a post-practicum interview revealed six main themes in two categories: Teacher Impacts (Planning and Curricular Design, Delivery, Practicum Experience) and Student Impacts (Classroom, Learning Outcomes, Learning Experience). While generalizations to other English Language Arts (ELA) classes cannot be made, the results of this pilot study suggest that tablet technology has the potential to aid the transition to 21st century learning at the secondary level, and warrants further research and attention.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it