Investigating a School STEM Lab as a Site for Collaborative Inquiry: Exploring Makerspace Potential and Imbedded Creativity Through Reflective Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper summarizes research conducted a public secondary school in Vancouver, British Columbia, where teachers have developed and implemented a to teach science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Mostly through interviews with teachers, the paper chronicles the history and development of the STEM Lab and explores educators' objectives in creating and maintaining the laboratory. Also, the paper investigates the potential of the STEM Laboratory to become what some researchers call a makerspace, a space where participants (students and their teachers) may inquire and construct knowledge together---working collaboratively to develop deeper, more informed connections with technology and technological devices, with their communities, and with each other. Moreover, the paper explores the extent to which educators believe that the STEM Lab responds to recent changes in the B.C. Curriculum and the extent to which the lab, in helping participants to build confidence and proficiency in technical knowledge, also fosters the development of more general skills, including proficiency in inquiry and problem-solving, creative self-expression, and collaborative participation in a community of learners.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".