MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897796509

New Epistemologies in a Digital Age: Ways of Knowing Beyond Text-Based Literacy in Young Adult Learners Within An Ontario College Context

2015· dissertation· en· W2897796509 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kevin Pitts

Bibliographic record

VenueYorkSpace (York University) · 2015
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiteracy, Media, and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)LiteracyAdult literacyDigital literacyPsychologyPedagogySociologyMathematics educationHistory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to examine how young adult learners acquire and construct knowledge in a digital age within a post-secondary context. The research questions were: 1) What digital devices and technologies/tools do young adult learners use for learning and why? 2) How is the digital age (particularly the widespread use of the Internet) impacting knowledge acquisition and construction in young adult learners? 3) How should post-secondary educational curricula and practice be designed or re-designed to support young adult learners?
\nA mixed methods (convergent parallel design) study was conducted involving 63 student participants (18 to 24 years of age) attending a large urban community college in Ontario.
\nAnalysis of the data revealed five key themes: 1) participants identified and used go-to digital devices and tools (i.e., digital devices and tools participants preferred and opted to use first); 2) participants used a multiplicity of media, modes, and literacies in their learning; 3) participants valued the affordances of old and new educational practices and thus felt to be in a state of transition; 4) participants’ use of multiple media, modes, and literacies led to positive sum outcomes (i.e., increased capacity for learning); and 5) the mix of media, modes, and literacies used by participants resulted in more natural learning (i.e., learning that was more in keeping with participants’ natural ways of engaging in and perceiving the world around them). Another key finding was that although there were commonalities among participants, there also existed a great deal of individual difference in terms of the ways participants preferred to learn in a digital age.
\nInterpretation of the findings resulted in a re-conceptualization of meta-literacy. In the context of this study meta-literacy was defined as the set of literacy types that meet the following criteria: 1) use a dominant invention/technology; 2) are disseminated via a dominant medium; 3) are represented by a dominant mode; 4) appeal to a dominant sense (or senses); and 5) provide for the ability to consume and produce meaningful communicative artifacts via a dominant medium and mode. Orality, traditional literacy, and digital literacy were identified as literacy types meeting the above criteria. It is recommended that meta-literacy, in conjunction with other relevant frameworks, be considered in the design or re-design of college curricula.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.724
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.199 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYorkSpace (York University)Same topicLiteracy, Media, and EducationFrench-language works237,207