MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794193917 · doi:10.13140/rg.2.1.1577.0089

THE LOGIC OF CONSENSUS ON THE FOUNDATIONS OF SCIENCE EDUCATION IN CANADA: A DELPHI STUDY

2014· dissertation· en· W2794193917 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John Murray

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2014
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDelphi Technique in Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDelphi methodDelphiEngineering ethicsEpistemologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceEngineeringPhilosophyArtificial intelligenceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite certain episodes of Canadian influences on science education, the last six decades of science education in Canada has been a decidedly American experience – particularly from the standpoints of: 1) the foundational policy documents that have provided explicit impetus to periodic science curriculum reform in Canada; 2) the principal theoretical foundations, guiding assumptions, and goals of science education, and; 3) the development of curricular frameworks in Canadian provincial jurisdictions. Though contested, it will be argued here and supported by the research that the Canadian systems of science education operating in the provinces and territories have not had opportunity, historically, to engage in the architecture of curriculum uniquely from Canada that supplies broad and respected appeal to the context of Canadian society, its demographics, its geographic diversity, and its geo-political position internationally. The objective of this dissertation was to empirically determine the principal theoretical foundations and system conditions for a Canadian approach to science education. The research was conducted and documented through an online, anonymous, and asynchronous modified Delphi methodology. Over a five-month period, the assembled expert panel of 54 peer-acknowledged and representative science and education specialists from Canada - comprising fourteen identifiable professional affiliations in two cohorts - participated in a Delphi having three rounds. This first-of-kind Delphi has identified a number of consensus positions in accordance with standard statistical criteria developed in the research design. These consensus positions occur across four principal areas of impact on Canadian science education: (1) significant national and international globalization trends; (2) the foundations and goals of science education; (3) roles and responsibilities of stakeholders in curriculum, and; (4) a context for the future of science education in Canada. The findings of the study provide a new basis for, and constitute potential new challenges to, science education in Canada and argue persuasively for new terminology. Sustainability Science, Technology, Economy and Environment (SSTEE) is presented as a new, original guiding foundation for science education in Canada. This terminology constitutes a new tension for science curriculum and directly challenges the emergent trend of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) as a basis for science curriculum reform.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.652
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)Same topicDelphi Technique in ResearchFrench-language works237,207