MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3180738676 · doi:10.12973/eu-jer.10.3.1505

Understanding the Meaning of the Equal Sign: A Case Study of Middle School Students in the United Arab Emirates

2021· article· en· W3180738676 on OpenAlexaff
Yousef Wardat, Adeeb M. Jarrah, Georgeta Stoica

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Educational Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
Canadian institutionsSaint John Regional Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSign (mathematics)Symbol (formal)Meaning (existential)Mathematics educationInterpersonal communicationStyle (visual arts)TrigonometryMathematicsSet (abstract data type)PsychologyArithmeticLinguisticsSocial psychologyLiteratureComputer scienceArtPhilosophyGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p style="text-align:justify">The equal symbol has been used in diverse mathematical frameworks, such as arithmetic, algebra, trigonometry, set theory, and so on. In mathematical terms, the equal sign has been used in fixed command of standings. The study reports on the students meaning and interpretations of the equal sign. The study involved Grade 6, 7, and 8 students in a secondary school in Alain, United Arab Emirates (UAE). Much of the earlier research done on the equal sign has focused on the primary school level, but this one focuses on middle school students. The study shows that the maximum foremost understanding of the equal sign amongst Grade 6, 7, and 8 students is a do-something, unidirectional symbol. Students realize the equal sign as an instrument for marking the response moderately than as an interpersonal symbol to associate extents.</p>

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0220.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.558
GPT teacher head0.515
Teacher spread0.042 · 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 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

Citations27
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Educational ResearchSame topicMathematics Education and Teaching TechniquesFrench-language works237,207