MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943815996 · doi:10.55016/ojs/jet.v49i2.46293

Developing Pedagogy for the Creation of a School Makerspace: Building on Constructionism, Design Thinking, and the Reggio Emilia Approach

2018· article· en· W2943815996 on OpenAlex

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

VenueJournal of educational thought. · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTeaching and Learning Programming
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstructionismPedagogySociologyMathematics educationPsychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Making and makerspaces, current buzz words in education, have gained prominence for their ability to develop the problem solving, collaboration, creativity, and technological skills needed for the 21st century. In preparation for the creation of a makerspace within a primary school learning commons, a list of necessary pedagogical components were identified based on three distinct discourses: constructionism, as derived from the work of Seymour Papert and the team in the Media Lab at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the principles of design thinking in an educational context, and the pedagogy of Reggio Emilia. In examining these discourses separately, the writer determined elements common to all three. Drawing upon these common elements, guiding questions were developed that can be used to inform the creation of a school makerspace.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.528
Threshold uncertainty score0.515

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.314 · 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