Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of AI in school education is still in its infancy (Southgate et al., 2018); however,there is an increasing expectation for teachers to become “AI Ready” – able to integrate AIsafely and effectively into student learning, teaching students about how AI works and theimportance of using these powerful tools ethically (Luckin et al., 2022 p. XIV). This researchproject acknowledges the leading role TLs can play in shifting mindsets and practiceregarding generative AI platforms and will provide the groundwork for future investigationswhich more deeply investigate specific implementations of these or other similar tools.While the initial response of school systems might be fight (locking down access) orflight (pretending these platforms do not exist), a planned and informed strategy forembedding AI capabilities into educational practice, led by the TL as an information andpedagogical expert, is more likely to bring about long-term positive outcomes for studentswho will be learning and living in a world increasingly shaped by algorithms and automation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".