MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2480349630 · doi:10.5539/ies.v9n8p159

Examination of Turkish Junior High-School Students’ Perceptions of the General Problem-Solving Process

2016· article· en· W2480349630 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Didem İnel Ekici

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicProblem Solving Skills Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurkishMathematics educationPerceptionPsychologyJunior schoolData collectionGeneral educationClass (philosophy)Likert scaleDevelopmental psychologyMathematicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to determine Turkish junior high-school students’ perceptions of the general problem-solving process. The Turkish junior high-school students’ perceptions of the general problem-solving process were examined in relation to their gender, grade level, age and their grade point with regards to the science course identified in the study. The study included 604 junior high-school students who study at eight different schools. A perception scale about problem solving was used as the data collection tool. The study’s method was the survey model. The results from the data analysis revealed that Turkish junior high-school students had a positive perception of the general problem-solving process. It was seen that the perception of the students regarding their problem-solving skills was at a high level but that their willingness and determination regarding the problem-solving process was at a medium level. The results revealed that perceptions of the general problem-solving process of female students, students with a lower grade level, younger students and students who were more successful in the science course were significantly more positive than those of other students.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.408 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicProblem Solving Skills DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207