MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321022320 · doi:10.22329/jtl.v16i3.6961

Towards Local Community Involvement in Students’ Science Learning: Perspectives of Students and Teachers

2022· article· en· W4321022320 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Calkin Suero Montero, Laís Oliveira Leite

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Teaching and Learning · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Learning in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersErasmus+
KeywordsEuropean commissionPedagogyLearning communityScience educationPolitical scienceQualitative researchSociologySocial scienceEuropean union

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The European Commission calls for schools to move towards becoming open to their communities, integrating external social, civil, and expert stakeholders into authentic learning experiences’ development alongside teachers and students, particularly in terms of science education. However, little research or practical implementation has been reported on how community actors could participate in the development of such curricular learning activities. In this study, we present an implementation of the open science schooling (OSS) approach to science learning, where community involvement in the development of science missions takes a vital role. During the study, students developed science missions related to local societal issues that interested them in collaboration with their teachers and community experts, with frequent hands-on investigations outside their classrooms or laboratories, in five European countries and Israel. Questionnaires with quantitative and qualitative questions concerning students’ and teachers’ views and perspectives about implementing science education using OSS were administered after the participants finished their science missions. The results indicate the effectiveness of the OSS approach to science learning involving the community from both students’ and teachers’ perspectives. This study is a step towards supporting schools in becoming active agents of change through the implementation of contextualized learning experiences alongside external stakeholders.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.011
Scholarly communication0.0130.005
Open science0.0020.012
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 designQualitative
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 Teaching and LearningSame topicMobile Learning in EducationFrench-language works237,207