MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2284842130

Grade 9 Teachers Use of Technology in Linear Relations

2013· dissertation· en· W2284842130 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elena Corina Georgescu

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2013
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Technology Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationPerceptionContext (archaeology)Unit (ring theory)CorrectnessComputer sciencePedagogyPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to examine secondary mathematics teachers’ perceptions about technology integration in teaching the grade 9 Linear Relations Unit and to investigate the impact of these perceptions and teachers’ everyday practices on the development of student tasks, construction of content knowledge, and facilitation of students’ mathematical communication within the context of the Linear Relations Unit in grade 9 mathematics. Case studies were conducted with three mathematics teachers teaching in three urban secondary schools in Ontario. Qualitative data was collected through a series of ongoing classroom observations of the teachers. Additionally, interviews were conducted at the beginning and end of the data collection phase with each teacher. The results from this study suggest that the teachers perceived that the integration of technology in the Linear Relations Unit assisted them to: 1) create interactive and dynamic learning environments which helped make the content meaningful to students; 2) guide their instruction and to closely monitor students’ understanding and track their progress, by providing real time feedback; 3) help struggling students move forward in their learning when they did not master the prerequisite skills required to build upon a new math concept and to help them develop math interpretative and problem solving skills; 4) differentiate instruction and address different learning styles and skills making abstract content more tangible and helping students connect words to images and graphs; 5) teach students to verify and validate their answers and check for their correctness, as well as to avoid relying only on the visual aspect of mathematics; and 6) assist students build mathematical communication skills. Implications of the findings for future research and suggestions to secondary mathematics teachers integrating technology, in the context of the Linear Relations Unit, are also included.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.288
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace (University of Toronto)Same topicEducation and Technology IntegrationFrench-language works237,207