MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2891412449 · doi:10.15405/epsbs.2018.09.02.21

Main Trends In Cognitive Research In Education In Usa, Canada And France

2018· article· en· W2891412449 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Svetlana A. Dudko, Irina Elkina, Natalia L. Korshunova, Irina M. Kurdyumova, Светлана Марковна Марчукова, Irina S. Naydenova

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œEuropean Proceedings of Social & Behavioural Sciences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionReading (process)NeuropsychologyField (mathematics)Process (computing)PsychologyMathematics educationCognitive neuroscienceEducational neuroscienceWork (physics)Educational researchPedagogyComputer scienceEducation theoryPolitical scienceHigher educationEngineeringNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article deals with basic trends in cognitive research in education, which is in the progress in the USA, Canada and France now. The subjects of research are connected with emotions, memory, attention, thinking, educational problems, IT technology, etc. Lately much attention was paid to projects studying the role of emotions in the educational process and their influence on students’ cognitive development. The article describes various research carried out in the countries mentioned above, i.e. American courses in neuro-education, which may help teachers to use the results of cognitive research to work out their own methods of solving real educational problems. In Canada and France, much attention is devoted to studying factors influencing educational effectiveness and optimization of remembering processes. In France, there are a number of researches, which may help understand brain functions of younger schoolchildren in reading and mathematics. The results of these researches are published regularly, and every teacher may use it in his / her regular work. However, not all teachers wish to introduce the results of neuroscience research into their practice, and the governing bodies cannot impose on them to work in such a way. Therefore, in all countries engaged in cognitive research in the field of education, there is the problem of transferring knowledge from the field of neuropsychology and neuroscience to teachers that may be useful to them.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.912

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œEuropean Proceedings of Social & Behavioural SciencesSame topicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive FunctionFrench-language works237,207