MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413298585 · doi:10.37736/kjlr.2025.06.16.3.05

An Analysis of Digital Media Literacy Education Structures and Teaching Materials in British Columbia, Canada : Focusing on Information and News Credibility Verification and Media Representation

2025· article· en· W4413298585 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hyeon‐Seon Jeong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducation and Learning Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCredibilityMedia literacyRepresentation (politics)Information literacyDigital mediaComputer scienceMathematics educationPolitical scienceMultimediaSociologyMedia studiesLibrary scienceWorld Wide WebPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study analyzed digital media literacy education in British Columbia’s (BC) English Language Arts curriculum and public schools to inform the effective implementation of digital media literacy education in South Korea, following the introduction of the ‘Media’ domain in South Korea’s revised 2022 Language Arts curriculum. Document analysis was conducted on BC’s English curriculum, the Digital Literacy Framework, and teaching resources from specialized organizations such as CIVIX and Common Sense Media. Findings reveal that BC clearly defines digital literacy concepts and integrates these across multiple subjects, emphasizing language and texts as crucial resources for identity formation, social relationships, and civic engagement. Classroom activities involved verifying online information credibility, differentiating reliable news from misinformation, and creating forced perspective images. Recommendations for Korean education include clarifying core media literacy concepts, expanding integrated instruction, providing opportunities for creative production and critical reflection, and strengthening teacher professional development. Ultimately, digital media literacy education must prioritize critical thinking and responsible civic engagement beyond technical skills.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.333
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEducation and Learning InterventionsFrench-language works237,207