MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2493136539 · doi:10.13034/jsst.v9i1.150

The Water Project

2016· article· en· W2493136539 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Shantel Popp

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Student Science and Technology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Assessment and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesProject-based learningLibrary scienceSociologyComputer sciencePedagogyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This resource was created to embark on a STEM project in grade 8 science class. Students are exposed to four different units during the year in Ontario, including: Cells, Fluids, Systems in Action, and Water Systems. The learning objective was to create a project that linked each of these units together under a “systems” theme and incorporate engineering, math, and technology. Students were able to showcase their learning in a final presentation that highlighted the different components of the STEM project. This includes the pulley schematics, design, and calculations of their water filter and technology implementation. This project uses Google Apps for Education so students can collaborate on the project synchronously and asynchronously, as well as incorporates hard skills like using a microscope, and provides students with the opportunity to design and build techniques. Cette ressource a été créée pour s’embarquer en un projet de STIM en utilisant comme guide le curriculum de science ontarien de la 8e année. Les étudiants apprennent à propos quatre sujets différents pendant l’année scolaire, incluant Les Cellules, Les Fluides, Les Systèmes en Action, et les Systèmes Hydrographiques. L’objectif d’apprentissage était de créer un projet qui liait tous ces sujets ensemble sous un thème commun, les systèmes, et intégrerait aussi l’ingénie, les mathématiques, et la technologie. Les étudiants ont eu la chance de montrer les connaissances qu’ils ont apprises dans une présentation finale qui a souligné les éléments différents du projet. Cela inclut les moufles, la conception, les calculs de leur filtre à eau et l’implémentation de la technologie. Ce projet utilise ‘Google Apps for Education’ pour que les étudiants puissent collaborer sur le projet en synchronie et seule. Il incorpore aussi les compétences du niveau plus élevé, comme l’utilisation d’un microscope et donne les étudiants la chance de développer les stratégies et techniques de la conception et construction.

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)0.003
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score0.825

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2470.100

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.401 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Student Science and TechnologySame topicEducational Assessment and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207