MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389427082 · doi:10.21083/ajote.v12i2.7522

Alleviation of social injustices in STEM education: Harnessing pedagogical affordances of virtual and augmented reality applications through open learning

2023· article· en· W4389427082 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thasmai Dhurumraj, Sam Ramaila

Bibliographic record

VenueAfrican Journal of Teacher Education · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Practises and Engagement
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffordanceEngineering ethicsContext (archaeology)Promotion (chess)PedagogyRealisationSociologyKnowledge managementPolitical scienceEngineeringPsychologyComputer sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the extent to which pedagogical affordances of virtual and augmented reality (VAR) applications can be harnessed as a means to alleviate social injustices in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education through open learning. The enhancement of epistemic and epistemological access in STEM education requires coherent implementation of appropriate strategic interventions which are essentially geared towards the promotion of pedagogic innovation in its broadest sense. The empirical investigation adopted a qualitative research design located within the interpretivist paradigm. Qualitative data was collected through semi-structured interviews. The study is underpinned by the theory of social justice framework as a theoretical lens. Key findings emanating from the study demonstrated that sustainable integration of VAR applications in STEM education can essentially be harnessed as a catalytic tool to address the articulation gap between school and higher education through parity of participation within the broader South African context. The realisation of this key strategic imperative hinges to a large degree on the critical interrogation of enablers and constraints about sustainable utilisation of VAR applications in STEM teaching and learning.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.397
Threshold uncertainty score0.316

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.192
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAfrican Journal of Teacher EducationSame topicHigher Education Practises and EngagementFrench-language works237,207