MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292665511 · doi:10.21432/cjlt28248

Teaching Machines: The History of Personalized Learning, 2021.

2022· article· en· W4292665511 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Learning and Technology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExperimental Learning in Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSilicon valleyPoliticsEducational technologyField (mathematics)Teaching methodPersonalized learningMathematics educationSociologyPedagogyPolitical sciencePsychologyOpen learningLawCooperative learningEntrepreneurship

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Teaching Machines by journalist Audrey Watters blends the historical and political events of 1920-1960s in the United States and the changes in the K-12 school system, chronicling the rapid development of educational technology markets to show the inception and evolution of teaching machines. The author expresses her indignance towards Silicon Valley entrepreneurs who continue launching educational businesses, under the assumption that their “new” technological breakthrough will change the “stagnant” field of education technology. This book explicates how the “new idea” of personalized learning offered by current educational technology companies and industries dates back a century to the 1920s.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.181 · 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