MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2914675651

USE OF STUDENT TALK WITH ADOLESCENTS TO PROMOTE STUDENT LEARNING IN MATHEMATICS

2018· article· en· W2914675651 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David Hung Cheong Lan

Bibliographic record

Venue2018 Conference of the Canadian Society for the Study of Education · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Practices and Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationChristian ministryStudent achievementInclusion (mineral)Math educationConnected MathematicsPedagogyAcademic achievementPsychologyPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Half of Ontario grade 6 students did not meet the provincial expectations in the 2015 EQAO mandatory testing. The Ontario Ministry of Education reacted to this low achievement by allocating $60 million to the improvement of mathematics education at the elementary level. Together with the funds, some changes that have been effected include the inclusion of 60 minutes of mathematics daily and the hiring of more mathematics teachers. However, current research in Mathematics education claim that

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2018 Conference of the Canadian Society for the Study of EducationSame topicEducation Practices and EvaluationFrench-language works237,207