Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines self-directed learning (SDL) to determine whether it can be conceptualized as a single dimension, or as a multidimensional construct. As part of a larger study examining the relationship between personality and SDL, the current study collected data on demographic, personality and SDL variables using an online survey during the Fall of 2017. For the purpose of the current analysis, however, only the SDL related instrument and results will be discussed. Participants included 161 first-year Nipissing University students from a variety of programs. SDL was measured using the OCLI, a 24-item Likert scale questionnaire. An exploratory factor analysis was performed on the OCLI data to reveal the factor structure of the 24 items. Three factors, which together accounted for 32.63% of the variance in the observed variables, were selected for interpretation. Five items loaded highly on factor one, which accounted for 13.05% of variance in the data. Four items loaded highly on the second factor, which explained 10.28% of the total variance. Factor three, on which three variables loaded highly, explained 9.30% of the variability. The three factors were labelled: persistence/effort, reading proclivity, and social interaction, respectively, and may provide insight into the dimensions underlying SDL.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".