MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Using Virtual Environments to Motivate Students to Pursue STEM Careers

2013· book-chapter· en· W2507042125 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2013
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetence (human resources)Mathematics educationExpectancy theoryPedagogyPsychologyEngineeringSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this chapter is to bring a rigorous and well-studied theoretical framework of motivation to the study and design of virtual learning environments. The authors outline the key motivation constructs that compose Eccles and Wigfield’s Expectancy-Value Theory (e.g., Eccles, et al., 1989; Wigfield & Eccles, 1992, 2000), and how it can be used in the creation of a virtual learning environment designed to promote students’ interest in and motivation to pursue Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) careers. In addition, using Brophy’s (1999) model of the motivated learner, the authors outline how this type of motivational virtual environment can be incorporated in classroom instruction to further bolster adolescents’ motivation and competence in mathematics. Finally, they describe a NSF-funded project underway at Harvard’s Graduate School of Education that seeks to develop a 4-day mathematics intervention, merging innovative technologies with regular classroom instruction to spark students’ interest in STEM careers.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.006

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.296 · 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