MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1533241273

Self-Regulated Workplace Learning: A Pedagogical Framework and Semantic Web-Based Environment

2012· article· en· W1533241273 on OpenAlexaff
Melody Siadaty, Dragan Gašević, Jelena Jovanović, Kai Pata, Nikola Milikić, Teresa Holocher-Ertl, Zoran Jeremić, Liaqat Ali, Aleksandar Giljanović, Marek Hatala

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExperiential learningKnowledge managementInformal learningFormal learningActive learning (machine learning)Learning sciencesCooperative learningLifelong learningPsychologyCollaborative learningSynchronous learningOpen learningEducational technologyComputer sciencePedagogyTeaching methodArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Self-regulated learning processes have a potential to enhance the motivation of knowledge workers to take part in learning and reflection about learning, and thus contribute to the resolution of an important research challenge in workplace learning. An equally important research challenge for the successful completion of each step of a self-regulatory process is to enable learners to be aware of the characteristics of their organizationally-embedded learning context. In this paper, we describe how a combination of pedagogy and Semantic Web-based technologies can be utilized to address the above two challenges. Specifically, we demonstrate the proposed solution through the Learn-B tool that leverages ontologies to support self-regulation in organizational learning.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations53
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207