MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Broadening Conceptualizations of the Intended and Enacted Curriculum to Inform Research Design

2024· book-chapter· en· W4417350208 on OpenAlexaff
Emily Saxton, Nicole R. Rigelman, Corey Drake, Kim Markworth

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTeaching and Learning Programming
Canadian institutionsLearning Partnership
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptualizationCurriculumSuiteFidelityCurriculum theoryImplementationResearch designCurriculum developmentCore (optical fiber)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We outline a conceptual framework that supports our efforts to define our intended curriculum (Bridges in Mathematics) by identifying both core design features and essential elements. We discuss our conceptualization of the enacted curriculum, which intentionally prioritizes teacher responsiveness over fidelity of implementation. Together, these conceptualizations help us distinguish between implementations that are aligned with our intended curriculum from those that depart from our intended curriculum and they inform our research design. We share a suite of tools that measure the use of both the core design features, which are easily counted, and the essential elements, which generally require more complex measurement tools. Finally, we discuss how the measurement tools are designed to distinguish between enactments that are aligned and productive from those that depart from the intended curriculum in unproductive ways.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.246 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTeaching and Learning ProgrammingFrench-language works237,207