MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320492663 · doi:10.5539/jel.v12n2p52

The Imagineering Learning Model with Inquiry-Based Learning via Augmented Reality to Enhance Creative Products and Digital Empathy

2023· article· en· W4320492663 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Surang Sreejun, Pinanta Chatwattana

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAugmented Reality Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAugmented realityEmpathyEducational technologyMathematics educationPsychologyExperiential learningComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objectives of this research are (1) to study and synthesise the conceptual framework of the imagineering learning model with inquiry-based learning via augmented reality to enhance creative products and digital empathy, (2) to develop the imagineering learning model with inquiry-based learning via augmented reality to enhance creative products and digital empathy, and (3) to study the results after using the imagineering learning model with inquiry-based learning via augmented reality to enhance creative products and digital empathy. The participants in this research include seven experts from various institutions, all of whom are specialised in the design and development of instruction models and instruction systems. The research tools consist of (1) the imagineering learning model with inquiry-based learning via augmented reality, and (2) the evaluation form on the suitability of the imagineering learning model with inquiry-based learning via augmented reality. According to the results of this research, it is found that (1) the conceptual framework of this research includes instruction system, imagineering learning, inquiry-based learning, augmented reality technology, creative products, and digital empathy, (2) the imagineering learning model with inquiry-based learning via augmented reality consist of four factors, i.e., input factor, learning process, output, and feedback, and (3) the study of the results after using the imagineering learning model by seven participants shows that 3.1) the overall suitability of the development of the imagineering learning model with inquiry-based learning via augmented reality (overall elements) is at the highest level (Mean = 4.69, SD. = 0.47), and 3.2) the overall suitability of the development of the imagineering learning model with inquiry-based learning via augmented reality is at the highest level (Mean = 4.70, SD. = 0.46).

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicAugmented Reality ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207