MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2789647853 · doi:10.4018/ijopcd.2018040102

Student Personality Characteristics Differ in MOOCs Versus Blended-Learning University Courses

2018· article· en· W2789647853 on OpenAlexaff
Ada Le, Cho Kin Cheng, Steve Joordens

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlended learningPersonalityBig Five personality traitsPsychologyOnline learningMathematics educationEducational technologyMultimediaComputer scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article conveys how online technology in education has become increasingly popular, especially blended-learning and Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). Although, research to date on blended-learning and MOOCs have revealed various factors that contribute to student success; however, systematic research on the personality characteristics of the learner, and how this could affect course performance remains sparse. This article is based off of the authors survey of students in a MOOC and a blended-learning course in Introductory Psychology about various personality characteristics that they believed could influence course performance. The results indicate that students in the MOOC versus blended-learning course exhibit different personality traits, and that these traits are associated with MOOC but not blended-learning course performance. These findings have important implications for fine tuning online teaching techniques to the personality types of the learners, which could improve course performance.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.495
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.332 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course DesignSame topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207