MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2301801736 · doi:10.14288/1.0098706

An evaluation of an experimental science enrichment program : "Light and illusion", Vancouver School Board, Arts and Sciences Centre, Vancouver, B.C. September 1980-June 1981

2010· article· en· W2301801736 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicScience Education and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe artsLibrary scienceMathematics educationSociologyVisual artsPsychologyArtComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluated an experimental program in informal learning, “Light and Illusion,” developed by the Vancouver School Board in cooperation with the Arts and Sciences Centre of Vancouver. A mail questionnaire was developed based upon a review of the literature on informal learning . The questionnaire was distributed to the Vancouver School Board teachers who visited the workshop with their students. The study was conducted over a three month period; 94 of the 150 questionnaires sent out were returned (69% return ) . The questionnaire sought to determine which teachers (grade level and subject area) used the workshop, how teachers used the workshop, what teachers liked and disliked about the workshop, and what suggestions they had for future workshops. The results were reported as percentage responses to the questionnaire items. In addition , a series of observations and recommendations were made. In particular the study showed that 90% of the attending teachers were highly satisfied with the workshop as a learning experience for their students. They commented favorably on the quality of the exhibits , freedom of choice, and the noticeable increase in student interest in science. Elementary teachers rated the workshop more highly than did secondary teachers, although both indicated they benefited by seeing their students work in a novel environment. Teachers thought that further informal learning workshops should be offered to students through the cooperation of the Vancouver School Board and the Arts and Sciences Centre.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.860
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.282 · 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