MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052840573 · doi:10.5430/wje.v5n3p1

E-Learning for Elementary Students: The Web 2.0 Tool Google Drive as Teaching and Learning Practice

2015· article· en· W2052840573 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Angeliki Apergi, Angeliki Anagnostopoulou, Alexandra Athanasiou

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Education · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicProblem and Project Based Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcellenceContext (archaeology)Information and Communications TechnologyEducational technologyTechnology integrationPsychologyMathematics educationPedagogySociologyKnowledge managementComputer sciencePolitical scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is a well-known fact that during recent years, the new economic and technological environment, which hasemerged from the dynamic impacts of globalization, has given rise to the increased development of information andcommunication technologies that have immensely influenced education and training all over Europe. Within thisframework, there is an ever growing need for educators worldwide to effectively prepare their students for theassociated technological and social challenges; something that in reality will constitute the springboard towardsachieving future employment and social welfare. It thus becomes evident that technology in the new pedagogies ispervasive and is used as a means for discovering and implementing the deeper learning goals, namely those relatingto the creation of new knowledge in the world. In relation to the above, the present study focuses on the impact of theNew Pedagogies as perceived through the 21st century skills prism which are highly relevant to students’ futureacademic progress so as for them to achieve, on a long-term basis, personal and professional excellence. Specifically,in the context of creating new knowledge by using the power of digital tools, a case study which explores theexploitation of the web 2.0 Google Drive tool in 6th graders’ classes (elementary school) within Project-basedlearning (PBL) framework is examined. The research is expected to prove that the involved German educator isgoing to assist her students via a promising PBL activity so as for them to realize the value of ICT in the learning process.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.368 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of EducationSame topicProblem and Project Based LearningFrench-language works237,207