MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Bridging the Perspectives and Developmental Needs of All Participants in Curriculum-Based Telementoring Programs

2004· article· en· W1966068249 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Research on Technology in Education · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Technology Integration
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridging (networking)CurriculumComputer scienceMathematics educationMedical educationPsychologyMultimediaPedagogyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Telementoring, also referred to as e-mentoring or online mentoring, has been carried out in a wide range of K–12 environments and continues to grow in popularity. Through a review of several studies, we argue that the potential for telementoring to support deeper and more authentic school learning will not be fully realized unless researchers pay more conscious attention to the developmental character of telementoring relationships. We discuss the flaws of up-front training as an approach to improving program outcomes, and compare three other strategies (iteration, facilitation, and open access to models) that can be used in combination to supplement training.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score0.280

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.383 · 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