MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

VISIÓN DE LA CIENCIA: ¿COINCIDE EL ALUMNADO CON EL PROFESORADO DE CIENCIAS?

2017· article· es· W2781320471 on OpenAlexaff
Andrea García Torres, Olga Mayoral García-Berlanga

Bibliographic record

VenueBio-grafía · 2017
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational methodologies and cognitive development
Canadian institutionsMonsanto (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El aprendizaje de conceptos relacionados con las ciencias y la Educación Ambiental está marcado por la actitud que el alumnado presenta hacia las ciencias. En el presente trabajo se realiza un estudio sobre la actitud que presenta el alumnado y profesorado de primer curso de la Educación Secundaria Obligatoria (ESO) hacia las ciencias, concretamente, hacia la asignatura de Biología y Geología a través de la realización de cuestionarios actitudinales. La disposición que presenta el alumnado hacia las tareas y actividades escolares, en este caso relacionadas con las ciencias, encuentra parte de su origen en la disposición que transmite y ven reflejadas en el profesorado, pudiendo éste llegar a modificar la actitud y motivación que presentará el alumnado hacia la asignatura. Se puede decir que la actitud mostrada por el alumnado objeto de estudio es en general buena, no presentándose diferencias significativas en cuanto al género. En el caso del propio profesorado, la actitud frente a la enseñanza de ciencias en clase es muy buena, se puede decir que la parte extrínseca de la motivación del alumnado está, en este caso, cubierta por la motivación que llegan a observar en su profesor.

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)0.004
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0120.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.368 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBio-grafíaSame topicEducational methodologies and cognitive developmentFrench-language works237,207