MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167790545 · doi:10.1080/01421590400029723

Climate studies: can students’ perceptions of the ideal educational environment be of use for institutional planning and resource utilization?

2005· article· en· W2167790545 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hettie Till

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Teacher · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Environments and Student Outcomes
Canadian institutionsCanadian Memorial Chiropractic College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive dissonanceIdeal (ethics)PerceptionPsychologyMedical educationMode (computer interface)Resource (disambiguation)ChiropracticSocial psychologyMedicineComputer sciencePolitical scienceAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As educational climate strongly affects student achievement, satisfaction and success, it is important to get regular feedback from students on how they experience the educational environment. The Dundee Ready Education Environment Measure (DREEM) Inventory was administered on the same day to all first-, second- and third-year students at the Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College (CMCC) and the students were requested to complete the questionnaire as they were actually experiencing the educational environment at CMCC, and then to say what they would have wanted, or preferred it to be like. Valid returns were received from 146 (95%) first-, 123 (82%) second- and 73 (48%) third-year students (n = 342). The results indicated that the DREEM Inventory used in the Ideal mode, together with the responses in the Actual mode, could be used effectively to determine the dissonance between what they had and what they would have liked to have. It was found that there was a strong similarity in the areas of the educational environment that the different groups of students indicated as falling short of their ideal. The results of this study provided a useful basis for strategic planning and resource utilization.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations106
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical TeacherSame topicEducational Environments and Student OutcomesFrench-language works237,207