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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In northern Europe and Scandinavia, there is a tradition called Didaktik. It can be seen as both the art of teaching and as the “science for teachers”, helping us teachers answering didactic questions about WHY?, WHAT? and HOW? to teach (and support learning). Many areas of subject-specific Didaktik have in recent decades evolved from mainly practice-based methodology to quite independent research areas. This applies, for example, to the field of science-Didaktik (i.e., Science Education). Part of this field has a special interest in educational activities for socio-ecojustice. For instance, it can include complex issues used in teaching to build bridges across different curriculum subjects, among them STEM-subjects, in support of sustainability, reflexive Bildung and socio-political activism. The focus in this paper is on socalled didactic models and modelling aiming at actions for socio-ecojustice. In particular, the paper presents a model for eco-reflexive Didaktik, an example of a didactic model. Didactic modelling is the name for the processes when didactic models are used and developed, often by researchers in collaboration with practitioners. The didactic model in focus here is based on philosophical ideas and orientations, such as holism, critical realism, egalitarianism, altruism, reconstructionism and critical pedagogy.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it