MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2622028806

Estudo da contribuição de problematização como fonte de estímulo ao acesso e interação de alunos do 9º ano em EaD

2017· article· pt· W2622028806 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
C. Küll, Ana Cláudia Kasseboehmer

Bibliographic record

VenueINFOR Information Systems and Operational Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Digital Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Com o objetivo desenvolver e avaliar o potencial motivacional de uma estrategia de ensino adequada a uma plataforma EaD para alunos do 9o ano do Ensino Fundamental, este trabalho estudou a motivacao dos mesmos. Motivacao tem sua promocao, tanto por fatores externos quanto internos ao individuo. Uma das principais teorias neste campo e a da Autodeterminacao, centrada em afirmar que seres humanos possuem natureza ativa e sao propensos ao desenvolvimento saudavel a autorregularao. Utilizando-se de uma abordagem problematizadora, foi desenvolvida uma sequencia de atividades que envolvessem o uso do AVA. A coleta e analise de dados foi feita por: frequencia de acesso ao forum de discussao pelos alunos; verificacao da assimilacao do conteudo; questionario sobre as motivacoes quanto ao uso do AVA; entrevista com os alunos e com o professor parceiro da disciplina. Sua analise foi realizada atraves da triangulacao de dados e os resultados apresentados apontam que, apos a realizacao da sequencia didatica, houve um aumento de 18 vezes no acesso ao AVA e o conteudo foi ligeiramente melhor assimilado. Os alunos tambem tem sua motivacao caracterizada igualmente como de regulacao controlada e autonoma. Com isso, considera-se que a estrategia desenvolvida e aplicada neste trabalho foi positiva.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.578
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0130.007
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.304 · 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.

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINFOR Information Systems and Operational ResearchSame topicEducation and Digital TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207