MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3140639484 · doi:10.29173/iasl7532

Meaningful Research Projects

2021· article· en· W3140639484 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Lois Barranoik

Bibliographic record

VenueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReflective Practices in Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumAction researchRelevance (law)Mathematics educationFeelingParticipatory action researchPedagogyReflection (computer programming)PsychologyComputer scienceSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explored what students view as meaningful in a curriculum-based research project. A participatory action research approach was used to investigate the experiences of one classroom teacher and nine students while completing a curriculum-based research project in a senior level high school English course. The design of the research project was based upon the students’ shared definition and understanding about what comprised a ‘meaningful’ assignment. Choice, relevance, reflection and application were considered essential components by the students. Feelings played a primary role in the choices made and significantly influenced student learning and project completion.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.483
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIASL Annual Conference ProceedingsSame topicReflective Practices in EducationFrench-language works237,207