Acoustical characteristics of Technology Educational Shops in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Technology Educational Shops (TES) are designed to develop high school students’ technological literacy. Their acoustical conditions play a dominant role in the quality of these environments. TES are, at the same time, classrooms for learning and industrial workshops for making things. Each use has its own standards governing its acoustical characteristics: ANSI S12.60-2002 for classrooms and the Ondet & Sueur DL2 criteria for workshops. A major conflict could exist by using the same room for two different purposes. This study investigated this conflict by evaluating the acoustical characteristics of 20 unoccupied wood, metal and automotive shops. It conducted measurements of background noise level (BNL), reverberation time (RT), speech intelligibility index (SII), and DL2. Results showed that BNLs and RTs in most TES were higher than the acceptability criteria for unoccupied core learning spaces. SII values indicated bad/poor speech intelligibility for normal and raised voice levels and reasonable/good speech intelligibility for loud and shout voice levels. DL2 values were found acceptable in TES larger than 100 m2 in floor area. In general, these results indicate the poor acoustical conditions of TES as classrooms, and the need for special sound control measures.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".