An Investigation into the Academic Success of Prospective Teachers in Terms of Learning Strategies, Learning Styles and the Locus of Control
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
The present research aims to investigate the relationship between the learning strategies, learning styles, thelocus of control and the academic success of prospective teachers. The study group consists of 198 universitystudents in various departments at the Uluda? University Faculty of Education. Research data were collectedwith the Locus of Control Scale (Da?, 1991), the Determining Learning Strategies Scale (Güven 2008), and theKolb Learning Style Inventory (A?kar & Akkoyunlu 1993). The obtained data were tested with T-test, Pearsonproduct-moment correlation, and multiple regression analysis in independent samples. According to the researchresults, it was found that the learning strategies usage rates of prospective teachers increased in direct proportionto their academic success, and there was a positive significant relation between the usage of rehearsal learningstrategies and being externally controlled. Furthermore, it was determined that learning strategies have predictoreffects on academic success in learning styles.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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