MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410357560 · doi:10.1080/17439884.2025.2502516

Parametrizing ‘the digital’: education research methods for platform ecologies

2025· article· en· W4410357560 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueLearning Media and Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Education and Society
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNational Academy of Education
KeywordsEnvironmental educationTechnology integrationHigher educationMathematics educationSociologyPedagogyComputer scienceTeaching methodEngineering ethicsEngineeringEconomic growthPsychologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This conceptual article provides an outline of Manuel DeLanda’s concept of ‘parametrization' and its methodological possibilities for inquiry into emerging platform ecologies in education. Traditionally, education research has treated ‘the digital' as separate from the analog. However, transdisciplinary literature has shown how connective technologies blur these distinctions, expanding the scope of education research to include the interplay of social, technical, and political-economic relations within ‘the digital.' This complexity presents challenges for researchers in prioritizing aspects of these relations. To address this tension, we turn to DeLanda’s ‘parametrization' for setting inquiry parameters with ‘control knobs' to adjust the focus on relevant actors, activities, and interactions. By examining the influence of digital platforms like Google in educational settings, we illustrate how parametrization allows researchers to navigate scales and relations, offering insights into the nuanced impacts of digital technologies on teaching and learning practices.

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)0.007
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.795
Threshold uncertainty score0.841

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.385 · 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