MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285817071 · doi:10.56059/jl4d.v9i1.607

Comparative Advantages of Offline Digital Technology for Remote Indigenous Classrooms in Guatemala (2019-2020)

2022· article· en· W4285817071 on OpenAlexaff
Adrienne Wiebe, Luis Javier Crisostomo, Ruben Feliciano Perez, Terry Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Learning for Development · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital literacy in education
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousIntervention (counseling)LiteracySet (abstract data type)Quality (philosophy)Computer scienceDigital divideMathematics educationMedical educationMultimediaKnowledge managementPedagogyPsychologyWorld Wide WebThe InternetMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technology has been viewed as a means to improve the quality of education for children globally, particularly in remote and marginal communities. This study examines the comparative advantages of the use of appropriate technology (off-line servers with digital libraries connected to a classroom set of laptops) in ten intervention schools in Indigenous communities in Guatemala for one school year. The study was too short (due to pandemic restrictions) to demonstrate statistically significant differences for learning outcomes. However, using an instructional core model as a framework, qualitative findings supported four previously identified comparative advantages, and identified four additional ones relevant to remote Indigenous communities. The intervention validated the ability of technology to improve standardized instruction, differentiated instruction, opportunities for practice, and learner engagement. Newly identified advantages are: access to high-quality educational resources (substitution for print materials), teacher capacity-building, student technical skills and digital literacy, and sharing cultural knowledge.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.132

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Learning for DevelopmentSame topicDigital literacy in educationFrench-language works237,207