MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399488649 · doi:10.22318/icls2024.122460

Applying the Understanding by Design (UbD) Model to Support Critical Thinking and Multidisciplinary Inquiry in the Chinese High School Biology Curriculum

2024· article· en· W4399488649 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings. · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Critical Thinking Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultidisciplinary approachCurriculumEngineering ethicsMathematics educationComputer scienceManagement sciencePedagogyPsychologyEngineeringSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a method of guiding teachers to develop "critical action inquiry" curriculum lessons, using a UbD (Understanding by Design) approach.This method is being developed at South China Normal University, as part of an ongoing collaboration with researchers in the Critical Action Learning Exchange (CALE) project, at the University of Toronto.In this design-based research involving 12 faculty and 92 students, the research team and the pedagogical team accompanied teachers in their development of pedagogical scenarios and use UbD as a framework.We present our application of UbD to the design of a Critical Action Inquiry project called the Dongguan Coastal Flooding project.We show how the design of CALE activities can be guided by UbD, and discuss our next steps for applications with teachers in southern China.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.535
Threshold uncertainty score0.836

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.404
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