MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2973512034 · doi:10.5539/jel.v8n5p152

Experiences of Pre-School Teacher Candidates on the Development and Application of Slowmation in Science Education

2019· article· en· W2973512034 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zehra Özdilek, Betül Uğur

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnimal and Plant Science Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMathematics educationPedagogyScience education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of the study is to examine the pre-school teacher candidates’ experiences in developing and using a Slowmation as an educational technique with young children. This study also aims at providing the pre-school teachers’ reflections on the whole development and application process. The study was carried out with 65 pre-school teacher candidates (46 of them are from day classes and 19 of them are from evening classes) who were studying in the pre-school education department in the spring term of the 2017–2018 academic year. The researcher used phenomenological research method which relied on these data resources: field notes, open-ended questions, videos and photos and semi-structured interviews. It was concluded that pre-school teacher candidates have developed their skills in using the Slowmation technique during the course. The researchers also concluded that the Slowmation technique, despite having some limitations, has a positive effect on pre-school students’ learning process of the science concepts and it could contribute significantly to their skill development process.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.329
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicAnimal and Plant Science EducationFrench-language works237,207