MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2526222166 · doi:10.4000/trema.3400

Une recherche exploratoire pour accéder à la motivation de l’apprenant universitaire en formation à l’enseignement  dans son expérience de formation en ligne

2016· article· fr· W2526222166 on OpenAlexaff
Caroline Bourque, Céline Garant

Bibliographic record

VenueTréma · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alors qu’un taux élevé d’abandon est observé en formation en ligne, une recension a permis de cibler la motivation comme variable importante. Cet article présente une entrevue exploratoire réalisée dans le cadre d’une recherche doctorale. L’analyse préliminaire menée sur la base d’un cadre-synthèse de motivation en formation en ligne permet de dresser un portrait de l’expérience d’une apprenante en formation à l’enseignement et de la façon dont sa motivation se manifeste à l’intérieur de celle-ci.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrémaSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207