MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2294243890 · doi:10.28945/3395

Using Interactive Software to Teach Foundational Mathematical Skills

2016· article· en· W2294243890 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Larysa Lysenko, Steven Rosenfield, Helena Dedic, Annie Savard, Einat Idan, Philip C. Abrami, Anne Wade, Nadia Naffi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Information Technology Education Innovations in Practice · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityConcordia University
FundersMinistère du Développement Économique, de l’Innovation et de l’ExportationMax Bell Foundation
KeywordsMathematics educationTheme (computing)BoredomNumeracyCurriculumTest (biology)Elementary mathematicsAbstractionPsychologyComputer scienceLiteracyPedagogySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pilot research presented here explores the classroom use of Emerging Literacy in Mathematics (ELM) software, a research-based bilingual interactive multimedia instructional tool, and its potential to develop emerging numeracy skills. At the time of the study, a central theme of early mathematics curricula, Number Concept, was fully developed. It was broken down into five mathematical concepts including counting, comparing, adding, subtracting and decomposing. Each of these was further subdivided yielding 22 online activities, each building in a level of complexity and abstraction. In total, 234 grade one students from 12 classes participated in the two-group post-test study that lasted about seven weeks and for which students in the experimental group used ELM for about 30 minutes weekly. The results for the final sample of 186 students showed that ELM students scored higher on the standardized math test (Canadian Achievement Test, 2008) and reported less boredom and lower anxiety as measured on the Academic Emotions Questionnaire than their peers in the control group. This short duration pilot study of one ELM theme holds great promise for ELM’s continued development.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.189
Threshold uncertainty score0.952

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.355 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Information Technology Education Innovations in PracticeSame topicCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skillsFrench-language works237,207