MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3144226429 · doi:10.29173/iasl7540

Breaking Down Barriers

2021· article· en· W3144226429 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Dianne Oberg

Bibliographic record

VenueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender and Technology in Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe InternetCurriculumInformation and Communications TechnologyBest practicePedagogyPsychologySociologyMedical educationPublic relationsPolitical scienceComputer scienceWorld Wide WebMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada, as in many countries, teachers are being encouraged to integrate information and communication technologies (ICT) such as the Internet into the curriculum. A study conducted in Canada in 1999-2002 examined Internet use in schools through interviews with technology leaders, through surveys of teachers and principals, and through case study investigations of three school districts, each in a different province of Canada. The case study data from the three districts was analyzed, using the NVivo software program, to address three main questions: (1) To what extent was teachers' use of the Internet consistent with “best practice,” as described by Moersch (1999)? (2) What types of support systems appeared to be essential for effective Internet use in classrooms to occur? (3) What was the role of the teacher-librarian in contributing to effective Internet use in classrooms? The study showed that teachers were integrating the Internet into their teaching, but had not yet achieved “best practice,” and that teacher-librarians were influential in supporting teachers’ progress towards “best practice” in the use of the Internet in instruction.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIASL Annual Conference ProceedingsSame topicGender and Technology in EducationFrench-language works237,207