MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322153321 · doi:10.35335/curriculum.v1i1.51

Effect of demonstration method on learning success

2022· article· en· W4322153321 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Curriculum Development Teaching and Learning Innovation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationFocus (optics)Teaching methodComputer sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of teaching carried out in the classroom according to Mager is to focus on student behavior or performance as a type of out put that exists in students and can be observed and shows that these students have carried out learning activities. Thus the alternative hypothesis formulated has been able to know the truth in this research so that it can be taken as a conclusion from this study, namely that "The demonstration method applied in learning has had a real influence, in the sense that it can be relied upon as a good method for teaching. As one of the alternative learning methods that can activate students, the demonstration method can be applied in the classroom which is expected to increase the level of thinking and experience of students, especially if students are expected to practice about a material that is understood.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.734
Threshold uncertainty score0.848

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.384 · 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