The physical placement of classroom technology and its influences on educational practices
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
The purpose of this study was to gain deeper insights into how technology \nrestructures the classroom as a spatial setting and how the positioning of these \ntechnologies can be associated with educational practices. The research includes \na photographic and schematic representation of 115 classrooms in 12 primary \nschools in Belgium, resulting in a typology based on structural features of the \nclassrooms. Based on the typology derived and the specific positioning of technology, \nnine teachers were purposefully selected and interviewed regarding their \nperceptions concerning the link between the use of technology and the classroom \nlayout. The results indicate that (1) the positioning of technology can be related \nto specific types of technology use; (2) the classroom layout is in transition from \none central display to multiple screens; and (3) because of physical access to \ntechnology, the educational practice of individual classes is spatially dispersed \nover different locations within the school.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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