MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407987113 · doi:10.3390/su17052014

Children’s Visualization and Collaboration in a STEM Makerspace: Opportunities for Fostering Sustainability Awareness

2025· article· en· W4407987113 on OpenAlexafffund
Mijung Kim, Josh Markle, Qingna Jin, Kadriye Akdemir

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development
Canadian institutionsCape Breton UniversityUniversity of Alberta
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSustainabilityBusinessVisualizationKnowledge managementEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With growing concerns about climate change and environmental degradation, students’ understanding of sustainability and climate change has become an increasingly prominent topic in science curricula. This has increased the need for learning experiences that meaningfully address these topics in the classroom. In this study, we investigated how grade 6 students explored sustainability concepts through visualization, specifically by creating 3D models of a sustainable place in a STEM makerspace classroom. By analyzing students’ visualization and their collaborative problem solving, we examined how students conceptualize and navigate diverse perspectives related to sustainability. Our findings indicate that visualization supported students’ epistemic agency and engagement with sustainability concepts. In their 3D models, students highlighted the importance of greenery, renewable energy, local food sources, low-emission transportation, and waste management. They displayed diverse problem-solving approaches when encountering differing ideas in group work. and the visualization activities provided opportunities for students to reason, understand, and negotiate ideas on sustainability and climate change.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicInnovative Approaches in Technology and Social DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207