The pedagogical and multimedia designs of learning objects for schools
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
<span>While much has been written about learning objects, the focus of discussion has been on standards, theoretical principles or post-secondary applications. Little has been published about the issues of the K-12 sector. From the literature, interactivity and scaffolding are the two pedagogical aspects considered crucial to learning object design. In multimedia design, writers have focused on engagement, persistence and success in simulation, gaming, narrative and experiential situations. Using these criteria we examined the pedagogical and multimedia design features in 35 K-10 learning objects produced by The Le@rning Federation. Objects which met the learning and multimedia design criteria had clear objectives, multiple activities, high interactivity, learner choice and an extensive scaffolding interface behind the main design. Research on the use of learning objects by teachers and students is recommended as the next step.</span>
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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 it