The effect of the BalloonSat project on middle and high school students' attitude toward science
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study measured the effect of completing a BalloonSat project on student attitude toward science. Seven categories of student attitudes toward science were measured using the Test of Science Relate Attitudes survey (TOSRA). The research anticipated that the BalloonSat project would have similar effects on student attitudes as found in robotics projects, like FIRST. The researcher also investigated whether gender moderated the effects of the BalloonSat project. This study enrolled 138 students from three states and one Canadian province. Students were free to select membership in either the treatment group or the control group. Student attitude toward science was measured prior to the start of the study and at its completion. Mean scores for the control and treatment group were then compared using an analysis of covariance. The effect of the BalloonSat project only affected one attitude toward science, Leisure Interest in Science. The study did not find gender was a factor in the effects of the BalloonSat project. This study is the first study of the BalloonSat project on grade 7 - 10 students and provides some evidence that a BalloonSat project can impact middle and high school attitude toward science.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".