MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113667873 · doi:10.64152/10125/25186

Crossing Boundaries: Multimedia Technology and Pedagogical Innovation in a High School Class

2003· article· en· W2113667873 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage learning & technology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersMinistère de l'Éducation, du Loisir et du Sport Québec
KeywordsAffordanceContext (archaeology)Sociocultural evolutionPedagogyActivity theoryClass (philosophy)Educational technologyComputer scienceSemioticsSituatedLanguage acquisitionMathematics educationZone of proximal developmentTeaching methodMultimediaSociologyPsychologyLinguisticsHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although much has been written on computer technology and its potential for changing pedagogical practice, relatively little attention has been given as to how teachers' conceptualizations of teaching and other contextual factors relate to their actual use of these technologies.The present paper focuses on an innovative program in a Quebec high school, involving project-based teaching in networked classrooms equipped with laptop computers.One ESL language arts and two French content teachers' use of computer technology is discussed in relation to their conceptualizations of teaching and the way in which the pedagogical innovations featured in this program were supported by the broader social context.The discussion of pedagogical innovation is situated within sociocultural theory, notably in Engestrm's notion of an activity system and Tharp's views on the relationship between reform and the alignment of activity settings.Implications for language learning are addressed in terms of the affordances created within the context of this particular program.More generally, the paper argues for a vision of language learning and teaching wherein language is viewed more broadly in semiotic terms and computer technology is viewed as a representational resource within a multiliteracy pedagogy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.269 · 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