MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2779818430 · doi:10.1119/1.5018687

Using Psychology in the Physics Classroom: Five Steps to Improving Classroom Effectiveness

2017· article· en· W2779818430 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Physics Teacher · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetence (human resources)PsychologyMathematics educationPhysics educationStyle (visual arts)PedagogySocial psychologyVisual artsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Psychology has been an avocation of mine for almost 20 years, and over the past decade I have begun integrating this knowledge into my classroom. My first introduction to psychology was through the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator®. MBTI looks at preferences in how people interact with the world around them. By recognizing how different students receive, process, and communicate information, and how my communication style likely interacts with theirs, I have been able to improve my competence in the classroom. For example, my student evaluations have gone from the low- to mid-5’s 13 years ago to mid-6’s (out of 7) consistently over the last five years, during which time I have also won four teaching awards and have been nominated for one more at my institution.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.485
Teacher spread0.304 · 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