MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2561062515 · doi:10.4256/ijmtl.v17i3.37

Using Integer Manipulatives: Representational Determinism

2016· article· en· W2561062515 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Michael J. Bossé

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Mathematics Teaching and Learning · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversité de MontréalUniversity of Hawai'i
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)DeterminismMathematics educationFlexibility (engineering)Integer (computer science)Mathematical problemAlgebra over a fieldPsychologyComputer scienceMathematicsEpistemologyArtificial intelligencePure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Teachers and students commonly use various concrete representations during mathematical instruction. These representations can be utilized to help students understand mathematical concepts and processes, increase flexibility of thinking, facilitate problem solving, and reduce anxiety while doing mathematics. Unfortunately, the manner in which some instructionally employ representations potentially leaves students confounded and mathematical ideas unlearned. From the perspective of representational determinism, this paper explores the appropriate uses and misuses of concrete representations in respect to integer operations.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.659
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations16
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Mathematics Teaching and LearningSame topicMathematics Education and Teaching TechniquesFrench-language works237,207