The influence of the openness of an e-learning situation on adult students' self-regulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents empirical research conducted with French speaking adults studying for a diploma. Their training took place mainly in e-learning. The goal of this research was to identify and explain the processes of influence existing between two specific dimensions: the degree of openness of the components of the e-learning situation and students’ self-regulated behaviors in the management of these components. This research was based on the socio-cognitive theory of self-regulation (Bandura, 1986; Schunk & Zimmerman, 2007; Zimmerman, 2002) and on a theoretical definition of the notion of “openness” (Jézégou, 2005). It applied the “actantial model” (Greimas, 1966; Hiernaux, 1977) for analyzing data collected while using a specific validated instrument of assessment of openness (Jézégou, 2010a). The main results of this empirical work are the role played by three psychological dimensions in the influence processes identified. More empirical study is required to confirm their validity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".