MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946562029 · doi:10.1080/00221341.2019.1611906

The Potential Contribution of Geography Curriculum to Scientific Literacy

2019· article· en· W2946562029 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 Geography · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeography Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersDirectorate for STEM Education
KeywordsCurriculumScientific literacyMathematics educationLiteracyChinaRealization (probability)SociologyPedagogyEngineering ethicsScience educationGeographyPsychologyEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Few studies, if any, have systematically investigated the connection or relationship between geography curriculum and scientific literacy. With this realization, in this article, we examined the potential contribution of geography curriculum to developing students’ scientific literacy, with China’s middle-school geography curriculum as an example. Through content analysis and semi-structured interviews, we found that geography curriculum holds significant potential to develop scientific literacy, especially regarding interpreting data in various formats, scientific reasoning, and interrelationships among science, technology, society, and environment. This study could provide insights for educators to design interdisciplinary programs to develop students’ scientific literacy.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score0.597

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.304 · 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