MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099088807 · doi:10.22329/jtl.v7i2.2899

Mediating the Message of Action Research

2011· article· en· W2099088807 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Terry Sefton, Sheila Windle

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Teaching and Learning · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Practices and Policies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAction (physics)Ideal (ethics)Context (archaeology)Action researchComposition (language)Computer scienceMathematics educationPsychologyEpistemologyGeographyArtArchaeologyLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we argue that a multimedia composition of various data sources is an ideal and appropriate medium for conveying the complex, context-specific, teacher-directed, multi-layered, non-linear nature of collaborative action research (CAR). This compilation also expresses the main outcomes of eight CAR studies conducted by eight teams of teacher-researchers in southwestern Ontario during 2007-2008.

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)0.063
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.118
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0630.118
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.037
Scholarly communication0.0160.020
Open science0.0040.016
Research integrity0.0080.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.282
GPT teacher head0.506
Teacher spread0.223 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Teaching and LearningSame topicEducational Practices and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207