MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2356280052

Test of e-Learning Related Attitudes (TeLRA) scale: development, reliability and validity study

2016· article· en· W2356280052 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Dalton Hebert Kisanga, Gren Ireson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology (The University of the West Indies) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTrent UniversityNottingham Trent University
KeywordsCronbach's alphaPsychologyScale (ratio)E learningTest (biology)Reliability (semiconductor)Mathematics educationLikert scaleContent validityHigher educationValidityFace validityTest validityEducational technologyPedagogyPsychometrics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Tanzanian education system is in transition from face -to-face classroom learning to e-learning. E-learning is a new learning approach in Tanzanian Higher Learning Institutions [HLIs] and with teachers being the key stakeholders of all formal education, investigating their attitude towards e-learning is essential. So far, how ever, there has been little consideration given to research that examines teachers’ attitudes towards e-learning in Tanzanian HLIs and consequently, there is no standard attitude scale that has been developed to measure this. This paper presents the development and validation of a scale of teachers’ attitude to e-learning. Whilst being initially developed to assess the attitude of teachers in HLIs the authors belief, having piloted with pre-service trainee teachers in England that the scale transfers across national boundaries. The final instrument contains 36 items with a Cronbach alpha score of 0.857. Although the developed attitude scale was intended for use in HLIs, it can also be of interest to researchers investigating attitudes on other sectors.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.218
Threshold uncertainty score0.651

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations37
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology (The University of the West Indies)Same topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207