The writing on the wall: Classroom context, curriculum implementation, and student learning in integrated, community‐based science projects
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
Abstract In this study we examined curriculum integration in new ways by exploring the link between classroom context, the implementation of community‐based, integrated science projects, and the subsequent student learning. The literature is inconsistent regarding the benefits of an integrated approach to curriculum. The research design was a multiple case study conducted in two classrooms in different schools. We employed a “worldly interpretive framework” that recognizes and embraces the importance of context in framing curriculum practices and outcomes. We found that similar projects in the two classrooms produced distinctly different (and equally valid) outcomes—focused either on bounded discipline‐specific knowledge or, alternatively, on issues and problems that transcended disciplinary boundaries. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 45: 857–880, 2008
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 | 0.086 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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