MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800681720 · doi:10.21432/cjlt27572

Learning with Multiple Representations: Infographics as Cognitive Tools for Authentic Learning in Science Literacy | Apprendre avec des représentations multiples: l'infographie de presse comme outil cognitif pour l'apprentissage authentique en science

2018· article· en· W2800681720 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Engida Gebre

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Learning and Technology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicVisual and Cognitive Learning Processes
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfographicPsychologyCognitionHumanitiesContext (archaeology)Representation (politics)PedagogyMathematics educationComputer scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a descriptive case study where infographics—visual representation of data and ideas—have been used as cognitive tools to facilitate learning with multiple representations in the context of secondary school students’ science news reporting. Despite the complementary nature of the two research foci, studies on cognitive tools and multiple representations have evolved independently. This is because research on cognitive tools has narrowly focused on technological artifacts and their impact on learning outcomes with less attention to learner agency and activity structures. This has created challenges of sustainably applying cognitive tools in classroom teaching and learning. Using data from a design-based research project where secondary school students created authentic infographic-based science news reports, this study demonstrates how infographics can serve as process-oriented cognitive tools for learning and instruction of science literacy in classroom contexts. Results have implications for the study and design of learning environments involving representations.Cet article présente une étude de cas où l'infographie de presse – offrant une représentation visuelle de données et d’idées – est utilisée comme outil cognitif pour faciliter l'apprentissage au moyen de représentations multiples dans le contexte de production de rapports scientifiques par des élèves du secondaire. Malgré la complémentarité des deux axes de recherche, les travaux sur les outils cognitifs et sur les représentations multiples ont évolué séparément. En effet, la recherche sur les outils cognitifs s'est strictement concentrée sur les artefacts technologiques et leur impact sur les résultats d'apprentissage mais a accordé moins d'attention à l’action des apprenants et aux structures des activités. Il en résulte des défis pour l’application durable d’outils cognitifs dans l'enseignement et l'apprentissage en classe. À partir de données issues d'un projet de recherche orientée par la conception (design-based research) dans lequel les élèves du secondaire ont produit des rapports scientifiques authentiques intégrant des infographies de presse, cette étude montre comment l’infographie de presse peut servir

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.007
Scholarly communication0.0090.011
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.345 · 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

Citations43
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Learning and TechnologySame topicVisual and Cognitive Learning ProcessesFrench-language works237,207