MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2942663060 · doi:10.4018/ijgcms.2019010103

Modeling Games in the K-12 Science Classroom

2019· article· en· W2942663060 on OpenAlex
Kara Krinks, Pratim Sengupta, Douglas B. Clark

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated Simulations · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational Games and Gamification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffordanceComputer scienceGame mechanicsHuman–computer interactionScientific modellingMotion (physics)MultimediaArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Digital games can be used as a productive and engaging medium to foster scientific expertise and have shown promise in supporting the co-development of scientific concepts and representational practices. This study focuses on the integration of a disciplinarily-integrated game, SURGE NextG, with complementary model-based activities to support the development of scientific modeling in Newtonian mechanics. Two pedagogical approaches were designed. Students in both approaches modeled the motion of an object inside and outside the game environment. One approach involved the material integration of virtual game play through a physical modeling activity in the classroom. The second approach involved a complementary modeling tool using an agent-based computational programming platform. While both modeling activities demonstrated affordances to support productive student learning, this study highlights the significance of designing multiple complementary representations of the same phenomenon as a core element of game play and related modeling activities.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.161
Threshold uncertainty score0.249

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.309 · 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