Dysregulated Learning with Advanced Learning Technologies
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
Successful learning with advanced learning technologies is based on the premise that learners adaptively regulate their cognitive and metacognitive behaviors during learning. However, there is abundant empirical evidence that suggests that learners typically do not adaptively modify their behavior, thus suggesting that they engage in what is called dysregulated behavior. Dysregulated learning is a new term that is used to describe a class of behaviors that learners use that lead to minimal learning. Examples of dysregulated learning include failures to: (1) encode contextual demands, (2) deploy effective learning strategies, (3) modify and update internal standards, (4) deal with the dynamic nature of the task, (5) metacognitively monitor the use of strategies and make accurate metacognitive judgments, and (6) intelligently adapt behavior during learning so as to maximize learning and understanding of the instructional material. Understanding behaviors associated with dysregulated learning is critical since it has implications for determining what they are, when they occur, how often they occur, and how they can be corrected during learning.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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