MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2739870888 · doi:10.31129/lumat.v3i4.1021

Conditions of implementation of an inductive learning sequence about the periodic table in high school chemistry

2015· article· en· W2739870888 on OpenAlex
Louis Trudel, Abdeljalil Métioui

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLUMAT International Journal on Math Science and Technology Education · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicHistory and advancements in chemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationSequence (biology)Chemistry educationTable (database)Point (geometry)Sequence learningChemistryComputer sciencePsychologyMathematicsArtificial intelligenceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In chemistry education, understanding the structure and role of the Periodic Table has been linked to subsequent learning of key concepts such as the properties of chemical elements. However, the way teachers introduce the Periodic Table to high school students is mostly traditional, students learning to use it to predict properties of elements according to given rules (Ben-Zvi & Grenut, 2007). Such a way to proceed does not allow students to engage in authentic science activities. Thus our research pursues two main objectives. The first one is to conceive a learning sequence to engage students in activities where they have to propose their hypotheses and verify them against data. The second one is to study the condition of implementation of this learning sequence in high school chemistry course. The experimentation took place with 14 adult learners who followed a high school chemistry course in two successive periods of two hours each in an adult learning center. To study the implementation of the learning sequence, the main researcher held a research diary where he recorded his observations on the sequence of events. In it, he also wrote his reflections about the observed events and established links between his observations and the theoretical framework of the present research (Altrichter & Holly, 2005). Our results point out that the sequence engages students in developing the classifications as well as find arguments to test them as they discuss their ideas in small groups and later expose them during classroom discussion. We also discuss conditions of implementation, such as the importance of providing a way to register all the contributions of each team to help sharing and examining the various hypotheses. One key aspect concerns the ability of the teacher to find the proper balance between supporting students’ process of categorization while not interfering with it. As a conclusion, we discuss the advantages and the limits of the research and made suggestions for future research.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.232

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.338 · 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