MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401555702 · doi:10.1002/fer3.48

Science, technology, engineering, & mathematics, curricular integration, and the story form

2024· article· en· W4401555702 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueFuture in Educational Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAttention Economy in Education and Business
Canadian institutionsBrock University
FundersMinistry of Colleges and UniversitiesBrock University
KeywordsMathematics educationComputer scienceEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education continues to increase in popularity, it becomes imperative that generalist preservice teachers (PT) have both strong concept knowledge and pedagogical skills to properly support its integration. However, generalist PTs do not have enough knowledge or skills possessed by those in STEM's respective disciplines, impacting their perceptions of how the framework is disseminated. The finger, then, is pointed at PT education to provide the necessary education and training that would allow for high‐quality STEM education beginning at the elementary level. One novel approach to mitigate this problem is to introduce Kieran Egan's education theory on imagination (mythic understanding) and the theory of integrated curricula to PT. Throughout this philosophical inquiry, we explore integrated curriculum models, imagination (mythic understanding) and storytelling, illustrating how they may appear in a STEM‐oriented lesson within an elementary science PT course, and attend to the need for approachable, evidence‐based interventions regarding generalist PT STEM education.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score0.660

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.306 · 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