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
This article presents a scan of the concept of “digital literacy” and discusses issues encountered in the literature, including: a) challenges in the research base for conceptualizing digital literacy, b) the multiplicity of frameworks which attempt to situate digital literacy but lack sound theoretical origins, and c) wide disagreement among stakeholder disciplines, including education, media studies, library information studies and computing/ICT studies as to what specific skills or knowledge should fall under the umbrella term of digital literacy. The review focuses on the field of education and briefly examines the inconsistent local, national, and international curriculum standards used to both instruct and assess students. It concludes with a presentation of a brief assessment tool, the Software Recognition Test, which preliminary research suggests has predictive validity for educational use and could, with further development, be used for low stakes assessment of digital literacy for K-12 or post-secondary settings.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.033 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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