MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312075178 · doi:10.30722/ijisme.30.05.001

Learning Mathematics with Interactive Technology in Kenya Grade-one Classes

2022· article· en· W4312075178 on OpenAlexafffund
Larysa Lysenko, Philip C. Abrami, Anne Wade, Enos Kiforo, Rose Iminza

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Technology Integration
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersConcordia UniversitySocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsNumeracyMathematics educationLiteracyTest (biology)Set (abstract data type)Number senseMathematicsComputer sciencePedagogyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While countries in sub-Saharan Africa have made significant progress towards achieving universal school enrolment, millions of students lack basic numeracy skills. This paper reports the results of a pilot study that aimed at using the Emergent Literacy in Mathematics (ELM) software to teach mathematics in early primary grades in Kenya. Designed as a pre- and post-test non-equivalent group research, the study unfolded in 14 grade-one classes from 7 primary public schools. After having learned with ELM for about two terms, the experimental students (N = 283) considerably outperformed their peers (N = 171) exposed to traditional instruction with the effect sizes of +0.37 on the overall skills measured by a standardised test of mathematics. The impact of ELM activities was the greatest on students’ ability to take language and concepts of mathematics and apply appropriate operations and computation to solve word problems. On this set of skills, the magnitude of difference between the experimental and control groups was +0.77. This study also revealed some positive shifts in the teachers’ perceptions about their practice. The teachers who adopted ELM in their practice reported having gained more confidence in mathematics and comfort in teaching mathematics with computers.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.348 · 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics EducationSame topicEducation and Technology IntegrationFrench-language works237,207