MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2926625911 · doi:10.7202/1057975ar

Structural Relationships of Factors Which Impact on Learner Achievement in Online Learning Environment

2019· article· en· W2926625911 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tami Im, Minseok Kang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducation and Learning Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyTest anxietyAcademic achievementTest (biology)Goal orientationAnxietySelf-efficacySelf-regulated learningApplied psychologyMathematics educationSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to identify relationships of learners’ achievement goal orientation, self-regulation, test-anxiety, self-efficacy, participation, satisfaction, and achievement in online learning environments in Korea. A total of 1,832 student responses from a Korean cyber university were used to find structural relationships of factors. Causal relationships among various variables are provided as results of this study. Achievement goal orientation –approach, self-regulated learning, test-anxiety, and self-efficacy, were positively related to participation; however, achievement goal orientation-avoidance was negatively related to participation. Test-anxiety was directly related to learning achievement and it was found that participation affected learning satisfaction and learning achievement. It was also revealed that learning satisfaction was related to learning achievement. Results of this study suggest that a comprehensive management of learners’ psychological variables, such as achievement goal orientation, self-regulation, test-anxiety, self-efficacy for designing, and managing online learning environments is important to online learning organizations, instructors, and administrators for better learner support.

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)0.010
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed LearningSame topicEducation and Learning InterventionsFrench-language works237,207