MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057968500 · doi:10.14221/ajte.2012v37n10.2

The Tower Builders: A Consideration of STEM, STSE and Ethics in Science Education

2012· article· en· W2057968500 on OpenAlexaff
Astrid Steele, Christine Brew, Brenda Ruth Beatty

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œAustralian journal of teacher education · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicScience Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsNipissing University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScience educationEngineering ethicsSociologyPedagogyClass (philosophy)Mathematics educationEngineeringEpistemologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The call for the integration of ethical considerations in the teaching of science is now firmly on the agenda. Taking as illustrative a science lesson in a pre-service teacher class, the authors consider the roles of STSE (science, technology, society and environment) and the increasingly influential heavily funded STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) education initiatives. The origins and foci of both initiatives are discussed, as are their disparate ontological foundations. The use of Habermas’ knowledge theories in conjunction with ethical frameworks is posited as a way of considering both STSE and STEM perspectives and their implications for strengthening science pedagogy

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)0.011
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations15
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œAustralian journal of teacher educationSame topicScience Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207