MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4237985811 · doi:10.29173/cmplct8949

Free Time

2010· article· en· W4237985811 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
E. Yvette Stogner

Bibliographic record

VenueComplicity An International Journal of Complexity and Education · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEducational Assessment and Improvement
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Louisiana Department of Education dictates all public school districts follow its comprehensive curricula, designed to prepare students for standardized tests administered to all public school students in grades 4-11.These curricula provide teachers with activities and grade level expectations (GLE's) that should be covered and time schedules that should be followed.These comprehensive curricula have become a hotly debated topic since their inception, because many educators feel instructional creativity and personal teaching styles are being stifled.Teachers can no longer teach how and what they want to teach; they must follow the mandated guidelines.While the GLE's are a main focus of these curricula, their pacing schedules can be adjusted slightly by the local school districts.In order to better ready students for the standardized tests, my local school district encourages teachers to complete the curricula before the tests are administered during the spring semester.One particular year, the local school district's pacing chart labeled what remains of the school year after testing (about six weeks) as "free time."This brief article is a reflection of my teaching experience during free time.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3440.111

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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.305 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComplicity An International Journal of Complexity and EducationSame topicEducational Assessment and ImprovementFrench-language works237,207