MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367153826 · doi:10.7202/1096456ar

Digital technology in the early years: A reflection of the literature

2023· article· en· W4367153826 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Laura Teichert, Munizah Salman

Bibliographic record

VenueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l éducation de McGill · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLimitingEarly childhoodCurriculumEarly childhood educationDigital literacyReflection (computer programming)LiteracyPedagogyDevelopmentally Appropriate PracticeBest practicePsychologyMathematics educationComputer scienceDevelopmental psychologyEngineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early childhood education is rooted in developmentally appropriate practice and play-based learning curricula. In the 21st century, practitioners experience tensions when they are unsure of how to navigate digital childhoods while being confronted with contradictory information. For instance, early learning frameworks recognize the need for children to develop digital literacy skills, yet pediatric societies recommend limiting screen time. Thus, practitioners are left without best practice guidelines that would help them embed technology into early learning environments through pedagogies that align with play-based learning. This review examines research to date on age-appropriate and playbased uses of digital technology that could more naturally fit in preschool and kindergarten classrooms while also highlighting the potential benefits of using tablets in early learning classrooms.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.011
Science and technology studies0.0040.018
Scholarly communication0.0140.023
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0060.009
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 head0.194
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l éducation de McGillSame topicChild Development and Digital TechnologyFrench-language works237,207