MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123277306

Drawing Information in the Classroom.

2014· article· en· W2123277306 on OpenAlex
Jenna Hartel

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education for Library and Information Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Education and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBespokeConversationClass (philosophy)Variety (cybernetics)Citizen journalismSociologyPedagogyMathematics educationPsychologyComputer scienceWorld Wide Web
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

lies at the center of studies, the professions, and education. Yet there are few agreed upon pedagogical strategies for engaging students in our central concept. In many educational programs the nature of is assumed to be obvious and therefore left uninterrogated. Alternatively, students may be asked to read articles, such as Information as Thing (Buckland, 1991), in conjunction with a lecture, class discussion, or writing assignment. To expand the available options, this brief communication offers educators in studies a new, artsbased, participatory approach for teaching about itself.At the Faculty of Information, University of Toronto, I ask my students to draw a conception of on a 4 by 4 piece of paper, coined an iSquare. This activity serves as a genial entree to an abstruse topic, accommodates a wide-variety of learning styles and intelligences, complements the scholarly literature about information, leads to lively class discussions, and generates a bespoke collection of images that can be tapped throughout the semester.Conceptions of traditionally appear as definitions made of words, but there are compelling reasons to invite students into the conversation via images. Drawing activities have been used successfully in other fields to engage learners in the topics of celebrity (Gauntlett, 2005), teaching (Weber & Mitchell, 1995), and economics, (Budd, 2004), among many other matters. Visual theorist and educator Sandra Weber (2008) asserts that images are more accessible than academic discourse, capture things that are hard to put into words, communicate more holistically, evoke stories or questions, and help us pay attention in new ways.The classroom procedure is easy to execute and utilizes readily available, inexpensive materials. In advance, heavy white drawing paper should be cut into 4 by 4 squares. Good quality paper encourages students to take the activity seriously; the modest size keeps the images from sprawling and is more felicitous to display and manipulate afterwards. One side will be used for the drawing surface and the other to capture a profile of the participant. For greater consistency, black pens can be provided to all students, which limit the expression of to a simple monochrome figure. To begin, instructions should be presented as follows:On one side of the paper respond to the question What is information? in the form of a drawing. On the other side of the paper write your name, age, gender, and area of study. You will have 10 minutes. Please use the paper and pens provided.Each student will produce one unique drawing and altogether the class generates a diverse collection of iSquares, for a learning experience on both personal and social levels. My previous research has found (Hartel, in press) that the pictures capture the major themes surrounding today. For instance, some drawings will locate in the mind, in renderings of the brain or head animated with a thought bubble [Figure 1(a)]. Other expressions will reflect the communicatory and social aspect of information, entailing figures talking in twosomes or groups [Figure 1(b)]. Many pictures will likely capture information as thing (Buckland, 1991) with displays of books, documents, or technologies [Figure 1(c) and 1(d)]. Often students will envision in symbols, whether periods, dollar signs, or question marks [Figure 1(e)]. The dynamic, abstract, and somewhat mysterious nature of may appear in striking patterns made of circles, dots, or dashes [Figure 1(f)]. …

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.047
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.230 · 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