MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804672717 · doi:10.11575/ajer.v64i1.56439

Examining the Efficacy of Inquiry-based Approaches to Education

2017· article· en· W2804672717 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Calgary · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Critical Thinking Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffordancePedagogyOpposition (politics)Mathematics educationValue (mathematics)PsychologyContext (archaeology)Political scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Educational jurisdictions around the world have introduced curricular initiatives that emphasize the need for students to engage in inquiry-based education. This shift, has been met by significant public opposition, particularly in the Canadian context. Results from this study indicate that criticisms of inquiry-based approaches to education are largely directed at discovery learning, which has limited educational value. We note the significant affordances of guided forms of inquiry, such as problem-based learning, and approaches to inquiry aligned with the authentic education movement. Additionally, we highlight the specific instructional supports needed for processes of inquiry to promote elements, such as critical thinking skills and flexible problem solving abilities, necessary for success in a rapidly changing world.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.678
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.144 · 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