MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3041348118

Incorporating NBIC social/ethical issues into STEM teacher education programmes

2020· article· en· W3041348118 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aldrin E. Sweeney

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Critical Thinking Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)PedagogySociologyEngineering ethics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heightened emphasis is being given worldwide to STEM education at all educational levels. In common with the Caribbean, various challenges regarding STEM education are being noted in other parts of the world, e.g. Canada (DeCoito, Steele & Goodnough, 2016). A critical component of STEM education pertinent both to Canada and the Caribbean is that of STEM teacher education. An ongoing research study in the School of Education at The University of the West Indies, Mona addresses an issue of relevance to Canada and the Caribbean, i.e. culturally relevant/responsive STEM teacher education (e.g. Aikenhead & Elliott, 2010). The study investigates culturally relevant/responsive STEM teacher education within the context of Caribbean secondary level science/STEM teachers’ perspectives and beliefs regarding social/ethical issues associated with nanotechnology-biotechnology-information technology-cognitive science (NBIC) converging technologies (Roco, 2016). Ultimately, the study wishes to provide a foundation for the development of a STEM teacher education degree programme that (i) develops STEM-specific pedagogical content knowledge to guide integrated STEM teaching and learning; and (ii) also develops STEM teachers’ awareness of social/ethical issues associated with a range of 21st-century STEM topics, and concepts. The ongoing study is being conducted utilising a qualitative research methodology. Key NBIC concepts/topics and associated social/ethical issues have been introduced into a course taught in the current MEd Science Education programme. Students are asked to discuss their beliefs, views, and perspectives (verbal and written) regarding these issues, and whether they may or may not choose to incorporate such issues into their secondary level science/STEM teaching. Data regarding these teachers’ beliefs, views and perspectives have been obtained from the course in question over three academic years, i.e. 2017-2018; 2018-2019; and 2019-2020 (course taught once per academic year). Data currently are being organised into representative themes for subsequent analysis. Both Canada and the Caribbean are currently engaged in regional/national efforts to shape the future of STEM education/STEM teacher education (e.g. the Canada 2067 national initiative, https://canada2067.ca/en/; Sweeney, 2019). Given the stated goals of the recently established Canada-Caribbean Institute, the study summarised here becomes significant in the opportunities it holds for collaborative research efforts in STEM education/STEM teacher education.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.007
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0020.014
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEducation and Critical Thinking DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207