MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2601707491 · doi:10.1108/ijilt-08-2016-0037

Digital making with “At-Risk” youth

2017· article· en· W2601707491 on OpenAlexaffabout
Janette Hughes

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Information and Learning Technology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiteracy, Media, and Education
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffordanceDigital mediaCurriculumFocus groupOriginalityVariety (cybernetics)Thematic analysisLiteracyInteractivityPedagogyIdentity (music)Digital literacyPsychologyComputer scienceSociologyMultimediaQualitative researchWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore how a small group of adolescents in an alternative care and treatment program develop digital literacy skills over time while immersed in a rich media setting. It also explores how the students use new media tools and affordances to “perform” their identities and to present themselves within their classroom community. Design/methodology/approach This ethnographic case study research involved seven students from a Canadian alternative school that provides educational programming for students from government approved care, treatment, custody and correctional facilities. Through an integrated arts-based curriculum, with a thematic focus on community and identity, the students used a variety to digital tools and media to create an “All About Me” book. Findings The students used inquiry-based learning and multiple modes of expression, facilitated by the multimodal, multimedia nature of digital media, including both screen-based and tangibles as essential components of knowing and communicating. The maker pedagogies employed in this intervention facilitated self-directed learning, as well as the development of perseverance and self-confidence. Originality/value In many work environments individuals are required to have knowledge of emerging technologies, and to employ this expertise in their work. Teaching students how to navigate their way through unfamiliar technology, to reflect on the process, and to communicate effectively, are important in both academics and future work environments. The authors continue to work with this group of students in the STEAM-3D Maker Lab and emphasize learning through discovery, design and the development of important skills such as perseverance, troubleshooting, resilience and collaboration.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations49
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Information and Learning TechnologySame topicLiteracy, Media, and EducationFrench-language works237,207