The Utility of the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory for Teachers among In-Service Teachers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the present study is to explore the utility of the compressed version of the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory for Teachers (MAIT-18) among in-service teachers. Knowledge of teachers’ awareness of metacognition is required to support students’ self-regulation, with the aim of establishing modern learning methods and life-long learning. The participants in this study were teachers (N = 208) from different sectors of vocational education. The data has been analysed using structural equation modelling. The Confirmatory Factor Analysis indicated good/acceptable model fit and convergence of each factor. Moreover, alpha scores of the inventory signify that the inventory is internally consistent. These findings reveal the utility of the MAIT-18 in measuring the Metacognitive Awareness of in-service teachers. Now, that the utility of the inventory has been examined among in-service teachers, comparative studies between in-service teachers and teacher trainees as well as longitudinal studies are prospective.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it