Learner centredness in high school distance learning: Teachers' perspectives and research validated principles
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
<blockquote>This paper reports on a study that examined teachers' perspectives on learner centredness in a distance learning context. Data collection relied on semi-structured interviews conducted with 42 Canadian high school teachers. Teachers' perspectives were analysed then categorised according to the four dimensions of a research validated framework of learner centred principles. The perspectives grouped into the cognitive and metacognitive dimension emphasised the goal oriented, student directed, personalised, and independent nature of distance learning. Those grouped into the dimension of motivational and affective factors emphasised course design driven, not by content, but by student interest, relevance, choice, and input. Perspectives in the dimension of developmental and social factors highlighted the role of discussion forums and chat for communication between students. In the dimension of individual differences, perspectives highlighted the asynchronous nature of distance learning that supports a flexible pace, respects individual needs, caters to different learning styles, allows diversity in assessment, one-on-one attention, support, and personalised attention.</blockquote><p> </p>
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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