Take Out Your Cell Phones - Class is Starting -- Revisited
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditionally cell phones have been viewed as disruptive and an obstacle to pedagogy in the classroom. Three years ago, a survey of students led us to the conclusion that the presence of cell phones is inevitable, and rather than fight a losing battle we adopted them into our classroom pedagogy. At CEEA 2012 the authors presented the initial results of a pilot project and the preliminary results of a first year implementation. The adhoc implementation resulted in many successes in removing barriers to student – instructor interaction such as lecture hall size, high peer pressure, and low student confidence. Unfortunately this adhoc implementation was also resource intensive and had limited room for expansion. In the 2012-13 academic year the course has redesigned its use of cell phones in the classroom to take advantage of a newly developed commercial classroom engagement software called Top Hat. This new implementation has allowed the authors to achieve the benefit of the adhoc system, an innovative method of asking questions in class, while also replacing the existing classroom response system. Students are now able to use Short Messaging Service (SMS) on their cell phones to both ask questions in real time and response to word, numeric or multiple choice questions posed by the instructor. Additionally the system has extensive room for growth. The logistics of the current initiative, student and instructor impressions, and future plans for the technology in our classroom will be 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".