MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104665068 · doi:10.26522/tl.v6i1.374

Every Picture Tells a Story: The Roundhouse Process in the Digital Age

2011· article· en· W2104665068 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Robin McCartney, Candace Figg

Bibliographic record

VenueTeaching and Learning · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDigital Storytelling and Education
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMemorizationCreativityPsychologyRecallProcess (computing)Working memoryCognitive psychologyCognitionMental representationSchema (genetic algorithms)Construct (python library)Computer scienceCognitive scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Roundhouse is a theory-driven, cognitive-based, visual story map designed to enhance long-term memory (Trowbridge & Wandersee, 1998). This type of graphic organizer requires learners to construct knowledge using “mindful” visual connections to replace often “mindless” practices involving recitation/memorization of abstract content. Students thereby create an observable schema of related concepts and icons in a sequential fashion. Roundhouse builds upon a student’s mental representation of what is already known, using a specified diagramming process called PDR (Plan – Diagram – Reflect). Studies have indicated that one of the benefits of using this technique is that students visualize their Roundhouse diagrams during assessment, promoting enhanced recall. Creativity, self-efficacy, and motivation for student understanding have been demonstrated in Roundhouse diagramming that incorporates digital technologies.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.008
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 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

Citations23
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTeaching and LearningSame topicDigital Storytelling and EducationFrench-language works237,207