MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319788234 · doi:10.1080/08993408.2023.2175559

Learning machine learning with young children: exploring informal settings in an African context

2023· article· en· W4319788234 on OpenAlexaff
Ismaila Temitayo Sanusi, Kissinger Sunday, Solomon Sunday Oyelere, Jarkko Suhonen, Henriikka Vartiainen, Markku Tukiainen

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Science Education · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicICT in Developing Communities
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceContext (archaeology)Mathematics educationArtificial intelligenceMachine learningPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and context Researchers have been investigating ways to demystify machine learning for students from kindergarten to twelfth grade (K–12) levels. As little evidence can be found in the literature, there is a need for additional research to understand and facilitate the learning experience of children while also considering the African context.Objective The purpose of this study was to explore how young children teach and develop their understanding of machine learning based technologies in playful and informal settings.Method Using a qualitative methodological approach through fine-grained analysis of video recordings and interviews, we analysed how 18 children aged 3–13 years constructed their interactions with a machine-based technology (Google’s Teachable Machine).Findings This study provides empirical support for the claim that Google’s Teachable Machine contributes to the development of data literacy and conceptual understanding across K–12 irrespective of the learners’ backgrounds. The results also confirmed children’s ability to infer the relationship between their own expressions and the output of the machine learning-based tool, thus, identifying the input-output relationships in machine learning. In addition, this study opens a discussion around differentials in emerging technology use across different contexts through participatory learning.Implications The results provide a baseline for future research on the topic and preliminary evidence to discern how children learn about machine learning in the African K–12 context.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.011
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations28
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Science EducationSame topicICT in Developing CommunitiesFrench-language works237,207