MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2099393923

Overcoming the Technical Nature in Learning Translation: Cabri Geometry, a Tool to Sustain Conceptual Comprehension?

2008· article· en· W2099393923 on OpenAlexaffabout
Annie Corriveau

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Language Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComprehensionConceptualizationMathematics educationProcess (computing)Concept learningComputer scienceSoftwareSequence (biology)Logical reasoningArtificial intelligencePsychologyProgramming languageChemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents the results of a didactic experimentation conducted with two elementary pupils (11-12 years of age) in a Quebec school in the of learning geometric translation with a mathematical software, called Cabri Geometry. The teaching-learning sequence experimented with Barth’s (2001) process of conceptualization. The working strategies of pupils were analyzed in relationship to this process. Their comprehension of the concept of translation was considered before and after the teaching-learning sequence using the Herscovics and Bergeron (1988) model of comprehension of conceptual schemata. Results indicated that by following the teachinglearning sequence, the logical mathematical comprehension of the concept of translation evolved in the pupils, while the logical- physical comprehension of this concept remained inaccurate. Moreover, the results revealed different utilization procedures of Cabri Geometry software. These utilization procedures likely affected the process of conceptualization and, consequently, the comprehension of pupils.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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 score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.235
GPT teacher head0.565
Teacher spread0.330 · 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicFrench Language Learning Methods→French-language works237,207→