MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W273150420

Mathematics Tasks as Experiential Therapy for Elementary Preservice Teachers.

2010· article· en· W273150420 on OpenAlexaff
Immaculate Kizito Namukasa, George Gadanidis

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Methods and Practices
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExperiential learningMathematics educationPsychologyPrimary educationElementary mathematicsPedagogyExperiential educationTeaching method
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In what unique ways can mathematics tasks contribute to pre-service teachers’ understanding of subject matter and pedagogy? And what school mathematics tasks can usefully be included in a pre-service program? To contribute to answering these questions, we report on the selection and choice criteria for mathematics tasks that we use in an elementary pre-service program. We see these tasks as experiential therapy. We believe that for teachers to see mathematics, and consequently mathematics teaching and learning, in new ways then they need to personally experience mathematics in new ways. We discuss at length one of the tasks, the Consecutive Terms task. The evidence that we have gathered shows that teachers‘ engagement with such tasks may help them become better positioned to teach mathematics in what we refer to as “warm” ways, in that re- service teachers begin to revisit their mathematical experiences and start seeing mathematics as different from the stereotypical view of a cold, rigid, individual endeavour.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.171
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)Same topicEducation Methods and PracticesFrench-language works237,207