A Situated Lens to Designing Assessments of Citizenship Competency
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As education systems increasingly emphasize teaching for the development of competency, teachers need support in how to design classroom assessments of competencies associated with their areas of learning. Teachers who engage students in learning democracy through deliberative dialogue and participation in real-world processes will find limited support in the literature on how to operationalize the development of associated competencies. In this first design cycle of an ongoing multi-stage design-based research study, a researcher and two classroom teachers in British Columbia collaborated to apply principles of authentic assessment (Koh, 2017) to the design of an assessment of the citizenship competencies Grades 6 and 7 students may have developed when deliberating as citizens in a real-world public engagement process. Findings suggest promising value in using a situated lens and an associated heuristic to operationalize these competencies, and the ability to prioritize to be a potentially transferable feature of citizenship competency.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it