MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396695173 · doi:10.5430/jct.v13n2p83

Development and Application of Elementary School AI Education Program Using the International Baccalaureate (IB) Primary Years Programme (PYP) Approach

2024· article· en· W4396695173 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Teaching · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Research and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationPrimary (astronomy)Medical educationPrimary educationPsychologyMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study is to enhance elementary school students' foundational understanding of artificial intelligence (AI) and to foster their Computational thinking. This goal was realized through the creation of an AI education program integrating the ADDIE model and the International Baccalaureate (IB) Primary Years Programme (PYP) teaching methodology. Before developing the educational program, we conducted a preliminary needs analysis with 60 fifth-grade students from IB World School P Elementary and 36 staff members, aligning with the stages of the ADDIE model. Drawing from the outcomes of this preliminary needs analysis, we opted for the transdisciplinary theme 'How the world works,' as it resonated most aptly with AI-related content, as determined by participating educators. Real-life AI-based concepts were seamlessly woven into the educational material. Throughout the program, students actively engaged in exploratory activities centered on the chosen transdisciplinary theme and central concept. Collaborating on team projects, they collectively tackled problem-solving processes, completing activities and assignments aimed at fostering self-directed learning. To assess the effectiveness of the developed educational program on students' computational thinking, pre- and post-tests were administered. Validation results underscored that the program made a significant contribution to the enhancement of Computational Thinking among the participating students.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.330 · 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