MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2616276946

Using Inquiry-Based Learning to Support Newly-Arrived Chinese Intermediate-Aged Immigrant Students

2017· article· en· W2616276946 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shi Dandan

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Systems and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationMathematics educationPsychologyPedagogyPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An increasing number of Chinese students are coming to study in Ontario and many of them are adolescents who have been largely exposed to the Chinese education but are new to the Ontario learning environment. This qualitative research study examined the question: how is a small sample of Ontario intermediate teachers using an inquiry-based learning approach to support the learning needs of newly arrived Chinese students? Data was collected through semi-structured interviews with three Ontario intermediate teachers who have worked with a large number of Chinese immigrant students. Four themes emerged from the interview transcripts: challenges reportedly faced by newly-arrived Chinese intermediate- aged students; teachers’ interpretation and application of inquiry-based learning (IBL) approaches to support Chinese newcomer students; Chinese students’ reported responses to IBL; and challenges faced by teachers when supporting Chinese immigrant students. Implications for the Ontario education community and personal practice are discussed. Recommendations are made for the Ontario education community and teachers in particular.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.343
Threshold uncertainty score0.682

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.395
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace (University of Toronto)Same topicEducation Systems and PolicyFrench-language works237,207