MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132113794 · doi:10.7202/900096ar

Évaluation d’une calculatrice auto-correctrice : Classmate 88

2009· article· fr· W2132113794 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Raphael Bertrand

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue des sciences de l éducation · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Appareil de table conçu en premier lieu pour l’étudiant, mais utile aussi à l’enseignant, la calculatrice auto-correctrice Classmate 88 est préparée pour exécuter trois fonctions. En plus de calculer à l’aide des quatre opérations de base comme toute bonne calculatrice, la Classmate 88 peut fournir, sur commande et ce par choix au hasard, des problèmes et les corriger un à un, ou fournir une série de problèmes avec ou sans réponse, au gré de son utilisateur. Au cours de l’année académique 1976-77 une étude exploratoire a été menée dans quatre classes du second cycle du primaire de la Commission Scolaire de Sainte-Foy, en vue de déterminer les utilités de cet appareil dans la classe même. Puis une expérience a été réalisée en 1977-78, dans huit classes du second cycle du primaire de la Commission Scolaire de Sainte-Foy. Le but de cette expérience était d’évaluer les gains d’apprentissage des utilisateurs de la Classmate 88 dans les domaines suivants de techniques opératoires : addition, soustraction, multiplication, division, fractions et décimaux. Il sera fait rapport dans cet article, des résultats de ces deux expériences.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.004

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 head0.472
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.004 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue des sciences de l éducationSame topicMathematics Education and Teaching TechniquesFrench-language works237,207