Crossing Boundaries: Multimedia Technology and Pedagogical Innovation in a High School Class
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 Engeström'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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".