MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406210623 · doi:10.1186/s40561-024-00358-x

Designing inclusive tech playful educative solutions for visually impaired learners in STEM education

2025· article· en· W4406210623 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

VenueSmart Learning Environments · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInclusion (mineral)Context (archaeology)Mathematics educationPedagogyPsychologyMultimediaComputer scienceGeographySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Education in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) is essential to achieving continued technological advancement. The most critical years for instilling knowledge are during childhood, and a strategic way to accomplish this is through playful materials. Therefore, there is a need to develop more inclusive solutions to achieve the good inclusion of visually impaired (VI) learners in this learning area. Despite their importance, specific design guidelines are scarce for developing playful, educational solutions for VI learners in STEM. Qualitative research was conducted through interviews and observations of the interactions between VI Learners playing an audio game and tactile 3D printed blocks, which covered an age range of young participants aged 8–18 years and adults aged 30–40 years in Taiwan. Surprisingly, the results showed that the combination of tangible and audio elements for playful purposes opens the way for students to show interest during educational interactions and, at the same time, allows them to understand the concept, especially when presented in different game missions but repeating the same principle/concept. In conclusion, there is a need for more inclusive strategies and approaches for playful STEM tools for VI learners, and one important aspect of achieving this is design guidelines. This study aims to understand the educational context of VI learners and their interactions when playing with educational materials to learn STEM concepts and develop design guidelines for the future development of playful STEM educational games.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.658
Threshold uncertainty score0.623

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.292 · 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