MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289260413 · doi:10.5430/jct.v11n5p155

The Development and Demonstration of Creative Education Programs Focused on Intelligent Information Technology

2022· article· en· W4289260413 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yuri Hwang, Eunsun Choi, Namje Park

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Teaching · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMarine and Coastal Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKorea Foundation for the Advancement of Science and CreativityMinistry of Education, IndiaNational Research Foundation of KoreaMinistry of EducationNational Research Foundation
KeywordsCreativityPsychologyMathematics educationQuality (philosophy)SwiftInformation technologyComputer scienceKnowledge managementSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To appropriately react to the swift development and changes of technologies these days, the need for creative teaching and learning has been increased. Making learners equip digital literacy of intelligent information has become necessary. This paper focused on three promising technologies that artificial intelligence humanities, forensic science, and digital therapeutics from intelligent information technology. We designed educational programs and applied the programs to 596 elementary and secondary school students in Korea. The objective of these programs was to promote the creativity of learners by using numerous techniques in thinking creatively and exploring newly emerging careers in the fields of intelligent information technology. To find out the educational effect, we tested the study's subjects for their satisfaction with education and their creativity. As a result of the study, the scores regarding the satisfaction of students engaged in the programs was high (M=4.18, SD=0.48), and the score on their creativity was also high (M=4.05, SD=0.38). These educational programs also showed high satisfaction and creativity scores regardless of school level. Accordingly, we suggest that the learning contents and concepts of intelligent information technology might be worthy of being applied across elementary and secondary school practices. From the result that the satisfaction, we found that it was necessary to improve quality of the artificial intelligence humanities program. Also, supplementary and advanced related activities are needed toward enhancing learner motivation and satisfaction.

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)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Curriculum and TeachingSame topicMarine and Coastal ResearchFrench-language works237,207