MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Elementary School Students, Information Retrieval, and the Web

2009· book-chapter· en· W2497368942 on OpenAlexaff
Valerie Nesset

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOpen Education and E-Learning
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVariety (cybernetics)Computer scienceWorld Wide WebThe InternetPopularityMultimediaEncyclopediaCurriculumClass (philosophy)PsychologyPedagogyLibrary science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In today’s modern world, elementary school students (aged 5 to 12 years) use computers for a wide variety of tasks. These include communication (e-mail, instant messaging, and chatrooms), entertainment (games, video, music, etc.), leisure (such as information relating to hobbies and general interests), and information retrieval to support class-based learning. Internet access is now very widely available from home, school, and public library. A major reason for accessing the Internet is to find Web-based information relevant to classroom learning activities. Undoubtedly the Web represents an enormous and potentially rich source of multimedia information on topics within the elementary school curriculum, but accessing this information does pose a number of challenges. We identify in this article three major problem areas that currently impede effective exploitation by elementary school students of Webbased information resources: information systems are not necessarily intuitive or straightforward for children to use; basic information literacy skills too often are inadequate; and too little content appropriate for young users is available on the Web. The first technology to gain popularity as a means for children to retrieve information was the CD-ROM. By the early 1990s, a wide variety of multimedia information resources targeted specifically at children were available in this medium. Many were children’s encyclopedias, designed to facilitate rapid retrieval of discrete information “chunks,” and often multimedia versions of an original print title. These CD-ROMs could offer an engaging, interactive experience for the young student. Although students were willing to explore and experiment with interfaces (Large, Beheshti, Breuleux, & Renaud, 1994; Large, Beheshti, & Breuleux, 1998), they were not necessarily effective at retrieving information from these CD-ROM titles (Marchionini, 1989; Oliver, 1996). In any event, regardless of its strengths and weaknesses as a classroom resource, CD-ROM technology proved transient and was quickly superseded by the expansion of the Internet and the rise of the Web. Yet the information retrieval problems revealed by CD-ROMs would continue to plague the Web.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.778
Threshold uncertainty score0.933

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.249 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicOpen Education and E-LearningFrench-language works237,207