MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095073127 · doi:10.14324/herj.17.2.05

What aspects of historical understanding feature in the analysis of moving-image sources in the history classroom?

2020· article· en· W3095073127 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Alexander Cutajar

Bibliographic record

VenueHistory Education Research Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducator Training and Historical Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TorontoYork UniversityFordham University
KeywordsRelation (database)Meaning (existential)MalteseEpistemologyHistorySociologyComputer scienceLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reflects on aspects of historical understanding developed in a classroom in which moving-image sources are analysed. Considered as non-fictional representations of the past, moving-image sources comprised broadcast images of historical events on newsreels, news broadcasts and documentaries. The study, carried out in a Maltese state secondary school, involved students (aged 15/16 years) analysing moving images as historical sources in their history lessons. Various aspects of understanding were identified: making connections with media content; using knowledge of one topic to shape another; discussing forms of historical knowledge in relation to each other; connecting with the wider historical picture; and constructing meaning using various language strategies. It is argued that these aspects offer a characterization of historical understanding when analysing broadcast footage of historical events in a constructivist classroom. It is suggested that underlying these aspects was students’ prior historical knowledge. I highlight the importance of maximizing on opportunities provided by moving-image sources to support understanding, particularly the co-construction of knowledge.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.366
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.083 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistory Education Research JournalSame topicEducator Training and Historical PedagogyFrench-language works237,207