La participation d'étudiantes et d'étudiants en classe d'apprentissage actif vue à travers leurs artefacts épistémiques physiques.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Epistemic artefacts of a physical nature are the material evidence of the work done and produced by students in the course of their learning. According to socio-cultural theory, they can mediate student participation and learning. The role they play, and what this tells us about new forms of teaching such as active learning (AL) in new environments such as active learning classrooms (ALC), had not been explored previously. We used a case study research design and ethnographic methods with 19 instructors from three colleges to explore three research questions based on this gap in the literature. Qualitative coding technique as well as latent class analysis were used to analyse the data, i.e., classroom observations (N=157). Our results confirmed that AL teaching generates physical artefacts. Furthermore, these artefacts play an epistemic role in learning and teaching. Our analyses distinguished four features of these artefacts, expressed as bi-polar modalities: (1) individual and/or collective; (2) private and/or public; (3) analogue and/or digital; and (4) new and/or reused. Other analyses led to more results. It is important to note that the public modality appears to be the most critical for understanding the mediating role of artefacts. We discuss the implications of these public artefacts on how learning and teaching takes place in ALCs and provide suggestions for practitioners using AA pedagogies in ALCs.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".