MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147663764 · doi:10.5539/ass.v11n2p276

Prediction of Mathematics Learning Strategies on Mathematics Achievement among 8th Grade Students in Jordan

2014· article· en· W2147663764 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Belal Sadiq Hamed Rabab’h, Arsaythamby Veloo

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematics Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationStratified samplingTest (biology)Achievement testConnected MathematicsMathematicsStandardized testStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study aimed to examine the extent of the student’s Mathematics Learning Strategy (MLS) factors such as mathematics attitude, mathematics motivation, mathematics self regulation, mathematics self efficacy and mathematics anxiety contribution to mathematics achievement (MA). The respondents of the study were 360 students from eight public middle schools in Jordan selected through stratified random sampling. The study used 65 items to assess the MLS. Moreover, the mathematics test (MAT) comprises 30 items. The results of multiple regression analysis showed that mathematics attitude, mathematics motivation, mathematics self regulation, mathematics self efficacy significantly contributed to MA, with the exception of mathematics anxiety that was found to have an insignificant effect on MA. Educators, principals and teachers should focus on most MLS factors in classes and students should be motivated to understand that the subject could be studied and passed just like other subjects, and to appreciate that it is an essential tool and a prerequisite for further education in many vocations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations11
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicMathematics Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207