MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3086695818 · doi:10.26522/brocked.v29i2.836

Making ‘Math Making’ Virtual

2020· article· en· W3086695818 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Candace Figg, Anjali Khirwadkar, Shannon Welbourn

Bibliographic record

VenueBrock Education Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationLearning environmentCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PedagogyComputer scienceMathematicsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, university professors are challenged to re-envision mathematics learning environments for virtual delivery. Those of us teaching in elementary teacher preparation programs are exploring different learning environments that not only promote meaningful learning but also foster positive attitudes about mathematics teaching. One learning environment that has been shown to be effective for introducing preservice teachers to the creative side of mathematics—the mathematics makerspace—promotes computational thinking and pedagogical understandings about teaching mathematics, but the collaborative, hands-on nature of such a learning environment is difficult to simulate in virtual delivery. This article describes the research-based design decisions for the re-envisioned virtual mathematics makerspace.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrock Education JournalSame topicMathematics Education and Teaching TechniquesFrench-language works237,207