MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387954400 · doi:10.22318/cscl2023.306568

Co-designing Technology Scaffolds and Scripts for Co-regulated, Adaptable Learning Community Curricula

2023· article· en· W4387954400 on OpenAlexaff
Joel P. Wiebe, Emilia Martin, James D. Slotta

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer-supported collaborative learning/˜The œComputer-Supported Collaborative Learning Conference · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScripting languageComputer scienceCurriculumSet (abstract data type)Knowledge managementIdentification (biology)Software engineeringHuman–computer interactionPedagogyPsychologyProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knowledge Community and Inquiry (KCI) is a learning community model that offers a set of principles to guide the design of collective inquiry scripts, however, the model has yet to include any direct role for a student model, nor any explicit mechanism for adaptable scripts.This study presents a technology innovation, co-designed with a middle school mathematics teacher, that will serve to support student modeling and adaptable scripts.Part of a larger study presently in progress, this paper presents a work-in-progress of the design-based research method, focused on problem identification, design, and testing of the scripts and technology innovation.The conjecture of the broader design experiment is that by adding new forms of scaffolds and student-sensitive adaptable scripts to KCI, we can facilitate adaptations and coregulation of learning that promote student outcomes (e.g., content acquisition, engagement, social-emotional learning, and the development of learners' identities in mathematics).

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.051
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.051
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer-supported collaborative learning/˜The œComputer-Supported Collaborative Learning ConferenceSame topicInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207