MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2775810204 · doi:10.18608/jla.2017.43.4

Talk with Me: Student Pronoun Use as an Indicator of Discourse Health

2017· article· en· W2775810204 on OpenAlexaff
Carrie Demmans Epp, Krystle Phirangee, Jim Hewitt

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Learning Analytics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPronounPsychologyConsistency (knowledge bases)Perspective (graphical)Learning analyticsDiscourse analysisPerceptionPersonal pronounLinguisticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Identifying which online behaviours and interactions are associated with students’ perception of being supported will enable a deeper understanding of how those activities contribute to student learning experiences. Features of student language, especially verbally immediate behaviours, are one of the aspects of student interactions in need of greater exploration within discourse-based online learning environments. As a result, the verbally immediate behaviour of pronoun usage is explored within online courses where the primary learning mechanism is student discourse. Student posting behaviours and features of their language, specifically their use of different classes of pronouns, are explored from the perspective of how supported students felt in their courses as well as how their behaviours and pronoun usage changed over time. Findings suggest that students who were taking instructor-facilitated courses felt more supported which was associated with higher levels of interaction and increased consistency in student behaviours from week to week within the term. Those enrolled in peer-facilitated courses, who felt less supported, used pronouns differently than those who experienced greater levels of support, suggesting the potential for pronoun-based analytics.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.387 · 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

Citations16
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Learning AnalyticsSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207