Seeking information for a middle school history project: The concept of implicit knowledge in the students' transition from<scp>K</scp>uhlthau's<scp>S</scp>tage 3 to<scp>S</scp>tage 4
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article reports the findings of a content analysis study of 16 student‐group proposals for a grade eight history project. The students listed their topic and thesis in the proposal, and information in support of their thesis. The study's focus is this topic‐to‐thesis transition. The study's conceptual framework is Kuhlthau's six stage ISP Model's transition from exploring information in S tage 3 to formulating a focus or personal perspective on the assignment topic in S tage 4. Our study coding scheme identifies elements of the students' implicit knowledge in the 16 proposals. To validate implicit knowledge as a predictor of successful student performance, implicit knowledge was coded, scored, and then the correlation coefficient was established between the score and the students' instructors' marks. In P art 2 of the study we found strong and significant association between the M c G ill coding scores and the instructors' marks for the 16 proposals. This study is a first step in identifying, operationalizing, and testing user‐centered implicit knowledge elements for future implementation in interactive information systems designed for middle school students researching a thesis‐objective history assignment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it