MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2592186347 · doi:10.14786/flr.v5i1.229

Re-animating the mathematical concept: A materialist look at students practicing mathematics with digital technology

2017· article· en· W2592186347 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

VenueFrontline Learning Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterialismMathematics educationComputer scienceMultimediaComputer graphics (images)MathematicsEpistemologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a philosophical approach to the mathematical engagement involving students and a digital tool. This philosophical proposal aligns with other theories of learning that have been implemented in mathematics education but rearticulates some metaphors so as to promote insight and ideas to further support continued investigations into the learning of mathematics. In particular, this philosophical proposal takes seriously the notion that a priori to activity, there are no objects which in turn challenge the notions of intention, affordance and/or representation. To exemplify this perspective, two episodes of grade nine students using a dynamic geometry software are analysed to elaborate how mathematics can be seen to emerge from working with a tool.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.458
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.388 · 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