MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2776676719 · doi:10.5539/jedp.v8n1p14

Using Item Response Theory to Evaluate Self-directed Learning Readiness Scale

2017· article· en· W2776676719 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rana Th. Momani

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Educational and Developmental Psychology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsItem response theoryScale (ratio)PsychologyApplied psychologyPsychometricsSocial psychologyClinical psychologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Item Response Theory becomes one of the most popular methods for instruments development and evaluation methods. This baseline study is a self-directed learning readiness (SDLR) 40 item scale with data from 648 undergraduate psychology female students attending Qassim University in Saudi Arabia through randomized selection to evaluate an SDLR scale at item and scale levels using GRM. Results provide more detailed diagnostic information to modulate the scale. GRM analysis led to the detection of two locally dependent items, one item with low discrimination parameter and 15 model misfit items. The scale often tends to measure low and moderate levels of SDLR. Advanced psychometric evaluations should be made and the SDLR scale must be reviewed based on quantitative and qualitative analysis.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.380 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Educational and Developmental PsychologySame topicInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207