MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1869001095 · doi:10.21432/t2s899

Self-Regulated Inquiry with Networked Resources

2003· article· en· W1869001095 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John C. Nesbit, Philip H. Winne

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Learning and Technology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKnowledge managementMetacognitionResource (disambiguation)Context (archaeology)Collaborative learningComputer scienceThe InternetEducational technologyConstructivist teaching methodsPlan (archaeology)Set (abstract data type)CognitionCooperative learningSelf-regulated learningNetworked learningMathematics educationPsychologyTeaching methodWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. In the context of continued growth in the accessibility of information through the internet, recent advances in theories of self-regulated learning present an opportunity to reexamine how learners work with networked resources in constructivist approaches such as problem-based learning, project-based learning, and collaborative problem solving. We present a Resource Inquiry model consisting of five stages: (1) Set resource inquiry goals, (2) Plan for resource study, (3) Search and select resources, (4) Study and assess new knowledge, and (5) Critique and recommend resources. Our model informs designers of online tools about how to support learners' cognitive and metacognitive strategies when learning activities involve interacting with networked resources.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 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

Citations29
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Learning and TechnologySame topicInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207