MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1817596450

The Embryology Research on Students’ Classroom Learning Behavior

2015· article· en· W1817596450 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Le Zhang, Sen Li

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)PerceptionQuality (philosophy)Transition (genetics)PsychologyComputer sciencePoint (geometry)Action (physics)Mathematics educationEpistemology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The inherent behavior transition of students’ classroom learning behavior is a process of transition from outside to inside and from the inside to the outside. Perceptual information is the starting point of classroom learning behavior inherently occurs. Abstract internalization is the basis of classroom learning behavior inherently occurs. Innovation generation is the key to classroom learning behavior inherently occurs. Firstly, the consciously degree of students’ learning cogitation restricts the processes of innovation generation learning behavior. Secondly, the learning cogitation type restricts the quality of innovation generation of learning behavior. External action is the practice of learning behavior inherently occurs. Firstly, the change of students’ learning behavior at any time should be observed and recorded. Secondly, students continuous reflect on the process of classroom learning behavior. Finally, classroom learning behavior should be constantly improved and modified according to the questions found by students after their reflections. These four aspects are not a simple “flat loop” from perceptual information to external application, but a “spiral process.” External application also means the beginning of the next perceptual information. These four stages are relatively independent, though they are connected to each other and interlocking.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.532
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.274
GPT teacher head0.546
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207