Children’s Web Portals: Are Adult Designers on Target?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper evaluates a web portal designed for elementary students not by adult professionals but by an intergenerational team of grade-six elementary school students and the researchers. The evaluation itself was undertaken by a focus group of six volunteer students. It is compared with the evaluations made by other student focus groups of web portals also designed for children but this time by adults.Cette étude évalue un portail Web destinés aux élèves de l'école primaire, conçu non par des professionnels adultes, mais plutôt par une équipe multi-génération rassemblant des élèves de sixième année primaire et des chercheurs. L’évaluation a été effectuée par un groupe de discussion composé de six élèves volontaires. Elle est comparée aux évaluations réalisées par d’autres groupes de discussion composés d’élèves et portant sur des portails Web pour enfants conçus cette fois par des adultes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".