MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224036361 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0265721

The programming curriculum within ISIS

2022· article· en· W4224036361 on OpenAlexafffund
Marion Deslandes Martineau, Patrick Charland, Hugo G. Lapierre, Olivier Arvisais, Chirine Chamsine, Vivek Venkatesh, Mathieu Guidère

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTeaching and Learning Programming
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research CouncilSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIndoctrinationCurriculumIdeologyTerrorismSociologyMathematics educationPedagogyPolitical scienceComputer sciencePoliticsLawPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From 2014 to 2017, the Islamic State in Irak and Syria (ISIS), a terrorist political organization of Salafist jihadist ideology, had put in place an operational and relatively stable educational system. Among its Complementary Programs, ISIS included a curriculum for programming using the Scratch software. In this article, we discuss this curriculum by analyzing the content of the official ISIS programming textbook, with the objectives of characterizing: 1) the curriculum's pedagogical intentions and definition of programming; 2) the programming curriculum; and 3) the religious and military indoctrination value. We found that, first, ISIS's programming curriculum intentions are more about religious and military injunctions to build the caliphate than they are about developing 21st-century skills such as computational thinking. Second, although the progression of learning in the sequence of activities designed by ISIS seems logical and, overall, well-ordered, the ISIS programming curriculum does not encourage the development of 21st-century skills such as problem solving, discovery learning, or creativity-nor for that matter, the transfer of programming knowledge to different contexts. Finally, the textbook is particularly rich in elements of military and religious indoctrination and effectively participates in the indoctrination of students by helping to inculcate values consistent with ISIS's jihadist ideology. This contribution seeks to better understand ISIS's approach to education, which could provide support for initiatives aimed at rebuilding impacted education systems and groups.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicTeaching and Learning ProgrammingFrench-language works237,207