MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Education in an Open Informational World

2015· other· en· W2152977989 on OpenAlexaff
Marlene Scardamalia, Carl Bereiter

Bibliographic record

VenueEmerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences · 2015
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSine qua nonConstruct (python library)Computer scienceSocial connectednessSociologyKnowledge managementData sciencePsychologyPolitical scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Education now functions in an open informational world in which there are essentially no boundaries constraining the information that may be brought to bear on any topic, question, or activity. Changes in the form and connectedness of information are giving rise to new issues concerning coherence, sustained work with ideas, and complexity. In place of the extended text of a well‐crafted book, with its carefully developed line of thought, information on the web is frequently presented as hypertext —relatively small packets of information complexly interlinked. It is now up to the reader to construct a connecting line of thought. The ability to produce coherent knowledge out of such fragmentary information now has a name: transliteracy. Transliteracy requires not only skill in using new information media but ability to carry on sustained integrative work with ideas—an ability traditionally the mark of a skilled teacher but now increasingly the shared capacity of a knowledge‐building community. Whereas traditionally the skilled teacher has smoothed the way to learning by simplifying complex content and problems, functioning in the open informational world requires that learners be able and willing to work with complexity and with problems that have not been structured for them. A current trend is to bring these requirements together in a focus on the “big ideas” of the disciplines. A number of “constructivist” educational approaches engage students in creative knowledge work and problem solving but neglect the sine qua non of contemporary knowledge building: students taking collective responsibility for idea development and improvement.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.012
Scholarly communication0.0140.014
Open science0.0010.012
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.003

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 head0.254
GPT teacher head0.568
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEmerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral SciencesSame topicInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207