MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052117450 · doi:10.1080/00461520.2010.515932

The Role of Epistemic Beliefs in Students’ Self-Regulated Learning With Computer-Based Learning Environments: Conceptual and Methodological Issues

2010· article· en· W2052117450 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEducational Psychologist · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational Strategies and Epistemologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyConceptual changeEpistemologySelf-regulated learningProcess (computing)Mathematics educationComputer sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Users benefit most from computer-based learning environments (CBLEs) when they are adept at self-regulated learning (SRL). Learner characteristics, such as epistemic beliefs, influence SRL processing. Therefore, research into learning with CBLEs must account for interactions between epistemic beliefs and SRL. In this article we integrate epistemic belief frameworks and models of SRL, and we argue that both phenomena should be modeled as a dynamic series of events. Such modeling allows for an examination of how various epistemic beliefs may be activated and deactivated through the process of self-regulation. We also show how CBLEs can be used to measure epistemic beliefs in novel ways and study how epistemic beliefs and SRL interact. Finally, we identify areas for future research and educational implications.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.566

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.345 · 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