MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790875903 · doi:10.30964/auebfd.405853

Okul Öncesi Aday Öğretmenlerin Öğrenme Stillerinin Matematiksel Algoritmaya Dayalı Olarak Modellenmesi

2018· article· tr· W2790875903 on OpenAlexaff
Gökhan Güneş

Bibliographic record

VenueAnkara Universitesi Egitim Bilimleri Fakultesi Dergisi · 2018
Typearticle
Languagetr
FieldPsychology
TopicLearning Styles and Cognitive Differences
Canadian institutionsEducation and Early Childhood Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bu araştırmanın amacı, okul öncesi öğretmen adaylarının öğrenme stillerinin, matematiksel bir algoritma yöntemi kullanılarak modellenmesidir. Çalışma 2015-2016 akademik yılında Ankara ilinde bulunan bir devlet üniversitesinin okul öncesi eğitimi anabilim dalında öğrenim gören 159 lisans öğrencisi ile yürütülmüştür. Araştırmada veri toplama aracı olarak Felder ve Soloman (1994)’ın Öğrenme Stilleri Envanteri kullanılmıştır. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre öğretmen adaylarının sağ yarıküre kontrolündeki aktif, algısal ve görsel öğrenme stillerini ağırlıklı olarak tercih ettikleri saptanırken; sol yarıküre kontrolündeki sıralı (analitik) öğrenme stilini de bütüncül (global) öğrenme stiline oranla daha fazla kullandıkları ortaya çıkmıştır. Bununla beraber araştırmada yer alan öğretmen adaylarının öğrenme stillerinde yaklaşık olarak % 11 oranında sağ yarıküre temelli stillere kaydıkları belirlenmiştir. Bununla beraber geliştirilen modelleme sonucunda sapmanın fazla olduğu öğrenme stili güçlerinin de % 12 yansıtıcı/aktif ve % 16 işitsel/görsel alt boyutlarında kayba uğradığı hesaplanmıştır.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.004

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnkara Universitesi Egitim Bilimleri Fakultesi DergisiSame topicLearning Styles and Cognitive DifferencesFrench-language works237,207