MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Instructional Design Perspectives for Information and Communication Technologies Curriculum

2022· book-chapter· en· W4281625579 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ebru Albayrak, Özcan Erkan Akgün

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in higher education and professional development book series · 2022
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender and Technology in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumInformation and Communications TechnologyChinaOrder (exchange)Information technologyEngineering ethicsPolitical scienceCoding (social sciences)Emerging technologiesTechnology educationPublic relationsPedagogyEngineeringSociologyComputer scienceSocial scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current developments in technologies and new concepts, such as coding, virtual reality, and computational thinking, are rapidly emerging and constantly changing and transforming the world. Information and communication technologies education therefore needs to respond to these developments in order to prepare student for the changing world. This study discusses secondary school level information and communication technology education initiatives in Canada, England, Turkey, Australia, Ireland, Finland, New Zealand, the United States, and China, reflecting on their approaches in order to inform future studies. The findings of this study show that countries used technology education standards to determine course subjects and that these subjects differed between countries. The most notable common element is teaching the use and logic of technology in daily life and being aware of ethical issues. In general, this study sheds light on the countries' technology education approaches.

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)0.004
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in higher education and professional development book seriesSame topicGender and Technology in EducationFrench-language works237,207