MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143121880 · doi:10.1177/1469787406069055

Teaching style and learning in a quantitative classroom

2006· article· en· W2143121880 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueActive Learning in Higher Education · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvaluation of Teaching Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationStyle (visual arts)Teaching methodHigher educationPsychologyResearch designQualitative propertyPedagogyComputer scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Education research over the last few decades has focused on the debate over which classroom pedagogies best encourage learning: teacher-centred or student-centred. Although research appears to support the philosophy that student-centred teaching provides for better learning, the supporting research is frequently limited to observational studies or limited in experimental design. Despite this, the trend has been to encourage teachers to adopt a more student-centred approach both in the teaching of the course material and as a model for future teachers. A pilot study was conducted in an introductory university statistics course using a Latin Square Design to experimentally collect both quantitative and qualitative data pertaining to student performance. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of teaching style on learning, assess these approaches in quantitative courses, and establish protocols for such studies using a statistically controlled design.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.947

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.356 · 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