MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979350885 · doi:10.4018/jvple.2011070103

Developing New Literacies through Blended Learning

2011· article· en· W1979350885 on OpenAlexaffabout
Deborah Kitchener, Janet Murphy, Robert Lebans

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Technology Integration
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNumeracyLiteracyMathematics educationBlended learningSituatedPedagogyEducational technologyPsychologySociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reports on the implementation and impact of two blended models of teacher professional learning that promote innovative classroom practice and improved literacy and numeracy in six school districts in Ontario, Canada. The Advanced Broadband Enabled Learning Program (ABEL), situated at York University in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, transforms how teachers learn and teach through a strategic blend of face-to-face interaction, technological tools and resources, online interaction and support. Learning Connections (LC), its sister project, uses the same model to improve literacy and numeracy in school districts. Research into the impact of both programs reveals increased student engagement and achievement, enhanced teacher efficacy, and improved results in literacy and numeracy. This report presents the findings from two participant surveys conducted in one large suburban board just north of Toronto, and one large rural board in Northern Ontario, and demonstrates how the working definition of literacy that teachers use in the classroom is being transformed by their use of technology in the classroom.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning EnvironmentsSame topicEducation and Technology IntegrationFrench-language works237,207