MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2521023111 · doi:10.21432/t22k6r

Collective Digital Storytelling: An Activity-theoretical Analysis of Second Language Learning and Teaching | Les histoires numériques collectives : une analyse systémique de l’activité d’apprentissage-enseignement d’une langue seconde

2016· article· fr· W2521023111 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Carmenne Kalyaniwala-Thapliyal

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Learning and Technology · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDigital Storytelling and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesSociologyPsychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the collective activity of a group of four students who created a digital story as a teaching resource that was to be used for teaching English as a foreign language. It uncovers and analyzes the actual processes underlining the activity as it unfolds from one stage to another. Four processes, viz., sociocognitive interactions, methodological processes, reflective processes and techno-semiopragmatic interactions were identified during the unfolding of the collective activity. Moreover, the results of this study highlight the role of the community in determining the activity of a lower level language group. Cet article décrit l’activité collective d’un groupe restreint de quatre étudiants qui a créé une histoire numérique en tant que ressource pédagogique pour l’enseignement de l’anglais langue étrangère. Il analyse et révèle des processus de l’activité lorsqu’elle se déplie d’une phase à une autre. Quatre processus, à savoir les interactions sociocognitives, les processus méthodologiques, les processus réflexifs et les interactions techno-sémiopragmatiques ont été identifiés. Les résultats de cette étude soulignent également le rôle de la communauté pour déterminer l’activité d’un groupe restreint ayant un niveau linguistique inférieur par rapport aux autres groupes.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.773
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Learning and TechnologySame topicDigital Storytelling and EducationFrench-language works237,207