MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

THE AFFECTIVE ESTABLISHMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF VYGOTSKY’S ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT

2008· article· en· W2004602628 on OpenAlexaff
Michael G. Levykh

Bibliographic record

VenueEducational Theory · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational and Psychological Assessments
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZone of proximal developmentPsychologyExtant taxonCognitionEpistemologyPedagogyCognitive science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A bstract Many recent articles, research papers, and conference presentations about Lev Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development (ZPD) emphasize the “extended” version of the ZPD that reflects human emotions and desires. In this essay, Michael G. Levykh expands on the extant literature on the ZPD through developing several new ideas. First, he maintains that there is no need to expand ZPD to include emotions, as its more ”conservative” dimensions (cognitive, social, cultural, and historical) already encompass affective features. Second, Levykh emphasizes that an emotionally positive collaboration between teachers and students in a caring and nurturing environment must be created from the outset. Finally, he asserts that culturally developed emotions must mediate successful establishment and maintenance of the ZPD in order to be effective. According to Levykh, Vygotsky’s notion that learning can lead development represents a crucial contribution to our understanding of teaching and learning by clearly showing that emotions are vital to human learning and development.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

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 studies0.0020.018
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations132
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducational TheorySame topicEducational and Psychological AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207