MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952642245

Factors underpinning student perceptions of laboratory experiences

2017· article· en· W2952642245 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of The Australian Conference on Science and Mathematics Education (formerly UniServe Science Conference) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRasch modelCategorical variableSample (material)Test (biology)Logistic regressionSet (abstract data type)PsychologyQuality (philosophy)PerceptionMathematics educationItem response theoryComputer scienceStatisticsMachine learningMathematicsPsychometrics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Survey data gathered as part of the Advancing Science by Enhancing Learning in the Laboratory (ASELL) project and its predecessors have been used previously to draw correlations between student perceptions of different aspects of laboratory-based activities and their perceived overall learning experience (Barrie, Bucat, Buntine, Burke da Silva, Crisp, George, Jamie, Kable, Lim, Pyke, Read, Sharma and Yeung, 2015). However, typical past analyses have involved the application of scoring techniques to ordered categorical response data, conflating student dependent and student independent contributions to student responses. Rasch modeling techniques provide an opportunity to control for the biases of individual students, revealing the more sample independent correlations in student perceptions which can be used to inform teaching practice. Particularly, the Linear Logistic Test Model (Fischer, 1995) is capable of expressing sample independent measures for each survey item as a linear combination of more basic factors of the experience. Aims The aim of this research was to derive a Linear Logistic Test Model for the ASELL Student Learning Experience (ASLE) survey, expressing “overall learning experience” as a linear combination of more basic factors of the learning experience. Methods A data set of 128,881 individual data points provided by over 9000 students in response to the ASLE survey, gathered from 29 practical activities run from 2011 to 2015 was input into a Rasch model, extracting student independent measures of quality for each experiment. These student independent measures were subjected to factor analysis, subsequently converting the results into a Linder Logistic Test Model of the ASLE survey data. Number of factors extracted was determined by balancing the parsimony of the model with the proportion of observed data variance explained, using the corrected Akaike Information Criterion (Burnham & Anderson, 2004). Results The final Linear Logistic Test Model reveals six major identifiable contributors to the laboratory learning experience. In descending order of impact on responses, these factors are the perceived connection to lecture theory, the quality of instructional material provided, understanding of theory through collaboration with others, the development of data interpretation skills, independent learning and the reliance on or appreciation for the demonstrator. A large component of “overall learning experience” appears to be due to aspects not addressed by ASLE survey items. The model yields equations for facets of the laboratory learning experience targeted by the ASLE survey, such as the equation for “overall learning experience” below (Equation 1). δ_(14 (overall learning experience)) = [■(-2@2@0@1@1@2@5)]⋅[■(〖 η〗_(theory focus)@〖 η〗_instructions@η_(collaborative understanding)@η_(data interpretation)@η_(independent learning)@η_demonstrators@η_(unexplained overall) )] (1) Similar equations are also obtained for other items of the survey, revealing models for fostering aspects of the experience such as student interest, increased understanding and development of technical skills. Conclusions Equations comprising the Linear logistic Test Model have a range of pedagogical implications for the structure of laboratory learning activities. Notably, increased understanding appears to be irrelevant to perceived “overall learning experience”, raising questions as to the consequential validity of using student response data to drive design of learning activities. A general theme of conflict between student preferences and attainment of learning objectives is recognized. References Barrie, S. C., R. B. Bucat, M. A. Buntine, K. Burke da Silva, G. T. Crisp, A. V. George, I. M. Jamie, S. H. Kable, K. F. Lim, S. M. Pyke, J. R. Read, M. D. Sharma & A. Yeung (2015). Development, Evaluation and Use of a Student Experience Survey in Undergraduate Science Laboratories: The Advancing Science by Enhancing Learning in the Laboratory Student Laboratory Learning Experience Survey. International Journal of Science Education, 37(11), 1795-1814. Burnham, K. P. & Anderson, D. R. (2004). Multimodel Inference: Understanding AIC and BIC in Model Selection. Sociological Methods & Research, 33(2), 261-304. Fischer, G. H. (1995). The linear logistic test model. Rasch models (pp. 131-155): Springer.

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.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.688
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.019
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0050.000
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 head0.163
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.289 · 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