MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

WIP: Assessing 21st Century Skills of High School Students in a Machine Learning Workshop with TinyML

2025· article· W7123947899 on OpenAlexaff
Algeir P. Sampaio, Paulo C. M. A. Farias, Roberto A. Bittencourt

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicTeaching and Learning Programming
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTeamworkCitizenship21st century skillsPerceptionWork (physics)Emerging technologies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research WIP paper describes a case study on the introduction of machine learning concepts in K-12 Education, providing students with more direct contact with new artificial intelligence technologies and potentially promoting an approach to foster the so-called 21st century skills, which enable students to deal with the technological world available in today's society. Working on skills such as Learning and Teamwork (LTE), Communication (COM), Citizenship and Social Responsibility (CSR), and proficiency in Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) may enable K-12 students to deal with work requirements that will be increasingly needed within the marketplace. In this study, we evaluated the perception of first-year high school students, between 15 and 17 years old, from a Brazilian public school regarding their own mastering of 21st century skills. The results show us how much such perceptions can be influenced by contact with knowledge of new technologies, even at an introductory level. In our case study, we used the TinyML framework, promoting an initiation to machine learning with the use of small hardware devices and minimizing the use of programming to simplify understanding and increase student motivation.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.292
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 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 topicTeaching and Learning ProgrammingFrench-language works237,207