Eye of the Beholder: Investigating the Interplay between Inquiry Role Diversification and Social Perspective Taking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Students and teachers engage in specific roles in classrooms, and within inquiry classrooms, these roles tend to be more varied compared to traditional settings. Teachers may take on traditional student roles including the role of learner, and students, for example, take on the additional role of question asker, traditionally reserved for the role of a teacher. Several of these roles are specific to perspective taking, in particular, social perspective taking (SPT). SPT is critical to successful social interactions and, because group work occurs frequently within inquiry-based teaching and learning environments, a better understanding of SPT roles is required. SPT roles within two different inquiry classrooms were closely examined through audiorecorded group interactions. Additional data were collected in the form of questionnaires, interviews, student and teacher log responses, and field notes. Two teachers and eight students participated. Social perspective-taking roles were dynamic and susceptible to influences including the nature of the classroom activities and instructional choices, student personality differences, and group-work dynamics. All participants adopted SPT roles, however, students who played an active role in choosing their work partners and who were assigned a task that required a consideration of the audience’s understanding tended to adopt more Imagine Other roles as opposed to Imagine Self roles and also adopted more emotionally-based SPT roles compared to students in teacher-formed groups who were assigned more cognitively-based assignments. Implications for researchers, consultants, and students and teachers were discussed.
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 | 0.008 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".