MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2777612279 · doi:10.26522/brocked.v26i2.607

The Impact of Use of Manipulatives on the Math Scores of Grade 2 Students

2017· article· en· W2777612279 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBrock Education Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationTest (biology)Intervention (counseling)PsychologyGroup (periodic table)Control (management)MathematicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Today’s society places a lot of pressure on schools, teachers, and students to improve test scores.This paper discusses the possibility of using mathematical manipulatives to improve student testscores and students’ attitudes towards mathematics. Forty-three Grade 2 students with age rangesbetween six and eight from a rural town in Saskatchewan were selected. They were dividedrandomly into two groups: the treatment group (n=22) and the control group (n=21) and theirpre- and post-test scores compared. Findings supported the hypothesis that students in thetreatment group who received the math intervention obtained higher post-test scores incomparison to their classmates in the control group.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.299
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.302 · 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