MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035959000 · doi:10.4018/jicthd.2010100103

Examining the “Digital Divide”

2010· article· en· W2035959000 on OpenAlexaff
Francis Bangou

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Information Communication Technologies and Human Development · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender and Technology in Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAppropriationICTSSociologyDigital dividePedagogyService (business)EpistemologyComputer scienceInformation and Communications TechnologyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the concept of “digital divide” first appeared, many researchers have argued for a more nuanced definition that highlights its complexities and better reveals its impact on the appropriation of ICTs. In this paper, the author analyzes the experiences of six Master of Education (M.Ed.) pre-service teachers learning to integrate ICTs into their practice. These case studies demonstrate how novice teachers’ learning processes can be impacted by the unequal distribution of the temporal, material, mental, social, and cultural resources available (van Dijk, 2005). A number of pedagogical and curricular recommendations for the M.Ed. program are then provided.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.458

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Information Communication Technologies and Human DevelopmentSame topicGender and Technology in EducationFrench-language works237,207