Integrated instructional programming models for development of 21st century education core competencies
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
This study modified the Assessment & Teaching of 21st-century Skills<sup>TM</sup> Knowledge Building Analytic Framework survey to compare secondary-level integrated outdoor, experiential, and ecological education (OE3) and conventional instructional programming models (IPMs) in Whitehorse, YT. The quantitative attitudinal data indicated the degree to which participants perceived each as developing 21st-century core competencies, including; creativity, collaboration, and critical thinking, as well as various social, digital, and economic literacies. Comparison of quantitative attitudinal data indicated higher average ratings by integrated OE3 participants for all categories, with statistically significant differences in nine of twelve competencies. Exciting information and communication technology (ICT) innovations have the potential to overshadow traditional OE3, which has been shown to promote 21st-century competencies and nurture holistic wellness. A refined definition of an `educational system' into component pedagogies and IPMs promotes conceptual blending to meet the evolving needs of learning communities and to increase resilience within a dynamic 21st-century educational system.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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