MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W268432590

ExploraVision: Extracurricular Research and Development

2009· article· en· W268432590 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Science Teacher · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Learning in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCONTESTCompetition (biology)Process (computing)PsychologyComputer scienceMathematics educationPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For the past 13 years, I have used the Toshiba/National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) ExploraVision Awards to structure my school's Extracurricular Research and Development (RD develop a vision of how the issue can be addressed within the next 20 years; and create an in-depth report detailing their research and vision. The report contains five storyboards (or web graphics) that can be incorporated into a website if the team makes it to the final round of the competition. To enter the competition, teams submit a contest entry form and their written report, which contains an abstract, description, and bibliography and must not exceed 11 pages. The description section of this report should provide a current overview of the associated technology, its history, and its future--including the scientific principles involved and the breakthroughs required to make the proposed technology a reality. The report must also present a brief summary of three alternative prototypes considered by the team, a summary of the design process, and an overview of the technology's potential consequences--both positive and negative. In addition, the five storyboards that communicate the team's vision--and adhere to the stated style and web graphic requirements--should be included in the report. Deviation from these requirements results in disqualification. There are four grade-level divisions in the ExploraVision competition: grades K-3, 4-6, 7-9, and 10-12. In each grade-level division, the first-place team in each of six regions across the United States and Canada advances to the final round. In the regional competition, the school of each first-place team is awarded a Toshiba laptop with web page development software. The final--or national--round of the competition requires teams to submit a website that can be viewed in its entirety in 5 minutes or less. The website must include a 1-2 minute video explaining the workings of the team's technology prototype. In this round, members of the first-place teams in each of the four grade-level divisions receive a $10,000 savings bond, and those on the second-place teams receive a $5,000 savings bond. Members of the top two teams in each division and their families, teacher-advisor, and optional mentor are awarded expense-paid trips to Washington, DC, to attend the Toshiba/NSTA ExploraVision Awards Ceremony and meet state and national government officials. Starting a team I publicize the Extracurricular R&D teams in early October by sending an e-mail inviting all students to attend an informational meeting. The day before the meeting, I send reminder e-mails and post signs on school bulletin boards. To begin the meeting, I introduce students to past ExploraVision projects, discuss how I work with individual teams in project development, review the competition rules and time requirements, and answer any questions that students may have. …

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.923
Threshold uncertainty score0.665

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.276 · 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