MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2611690867 · doi:10.38140/pie.v33i4.1927

Connecting with pre-service teachers’ perspectives on the use of digital technologies and social media to teach socially relevant science

2015· article· en· W2611690867 on OpenAlexaff
Ronicka Mudaly, Kathleen Pithouse-Morgan, Linda van Laren, Shakila Singh, Claudia Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenuePerspectives in Education · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicImpact of Technology on Adolescents
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffordanceSocial mediaDigital mediaSociologyAnimationScience educationComputer sciencePedagogyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As an interdisciplinary team of educational researchers we explored pre-service science teachers’ perspectives on using digital technologies and social media to address socially relevant issues in science teaching. The rationale for teaching socially relevant science was embedded in the concept of renaiscience, thus underscoring the need for science to be perceived as a human activity. We drew on generational theory to consider the educational significance of digital technologies and social media. Two different activities were used to elicit the pre-service science teachers’ perspectives. First, we invited them to reflect on a digital animation that we had produced, and they highlighted the advantages of digital animation as a medium to communicate a socially relevant message more appealingly to the Millennial generation. We then engaged these pre-service teachers in a structured concept-mapping activity to consider how digital technologies and social media might be used to address social challenges in South Africa. They drew our attention to the affordances of digital technologies and social media as a means to facilitate critical thinking, cater for diverse learning styles, and make high-quality scientific knowledge more accessible. They highlighted that teaching socially relevant science using digital resources can be cheap, convenient, collaborative, and creative.

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)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations13
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerspectives in EducationSame topicImpact of Technology on AdolescentsFrench-language works237,207