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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following is a report on a questionnaire study based on the Diffusion of Innovations in Education Model (DIEM), which synthesizes research on educational innovations. The social system under study included foreign language teacher educators in eleven Southeastern states (N=83). Regional foreign language teacher educators were targeted for gathering data regarding the ACTFL (American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages) Proficiency Guidelines (1986), a language teaching innovation. In analyzing results, inferential statistics tested the weight of some of the DIEM’s predictions about the nature of educational change. In terms of the model’s predictions, state mandates appear to hinder rather than facilitate adoption. However, results support the DIEM claim that innovation knowledge is associated with its adoption. While the DIEM provides conceptual clarity to research on change in educational settings, its usefulness as a way to explain and predict the success or failure of educational innovations in attaining adoption remains to be verified.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it