The Contribution of Scientific Project Competitions upon High School Students’ Acquiring a Scientific Viewpoint (Geography Lesson Case)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scientific research projects competitions for high school students have been held by TUBITAK (The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey) since 1969. Whereas only projects on science were taken into the scope of competition for long years, the projects appropriate to the interdisciplinary approach such as social sciences projects and values education have been started to be included beside science broadening the range since 2000s. In projects, it has been aimed to encourage students studying at high school grade for carrying out studies on basic, social and applied sciences, directing their studies and providing contribution upon the development of current scientific studies. The required qualification is projects’ being originated and developed from own knowledge, skill and original thoughts of the students, and being completed by the support of a counselor.Geography has started to be included in scientific project competitions since 2011. In this research, it was aimed to reveal the importance of secondary education students’ scientific project competitions upon their gaining a scientific point of view depending upon the branch of geography. In the research, case study design as one of the qualitative research methods was used. The study group of the research included 38 geography teachers carrying on their duties in Nevsehir province in 2015-2016 academic year. Semi-structured interview technique was used as data collection tool, and the data were analyzed using content analysis method. Obtained quantitative data were digitized, their frequency and percentage were obtained and interpreted.In the research, it was concluded that participating into scientific project competitions was very beneficial in terms of students, developed viewpoint of students in terms of various aspects, most of the geography teachers considered that the institutions they carried on their duties were adequate for students’ developing projects, teachers considered themselves competent for guiding students during the process of preparing the project, and preparing a project provided significant benefits and experiences for the future of students.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".