MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979310125 · doi:10.21432/cjlt27805

Validation of a questionnaire assessing students’ self-directed and collaborative learning with and without technology in Canadian middle school classrooms

2019· article· en· W2979310125 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Chantal Labonté, Veronica Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Learning and Technology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMedical educationHumanitiesMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the current study, the researchers examine the validity of a questionnaire assessing students’ perceptions of their self-directed learning and collaborative learning with and without technology with a group of Canadian middle school students. Lee and colleagues (2014) developed an 18-item questionnaire for use in assessing high school students’ perceptions of their learning in Singapore. Three hundred and twenty middle school students from across Alberta, Canada completed the questionnaire. The results of a confirmatory factor analysis revealed that the questionnaire did not have sufficient model fit. The researchers used a jackknifing procedure to systematically remove four items in order to achieve a psychometrically sound questionnaire. The results suggest that the reduced questionnaire is a useful self-report instrument for assessing Canadian middle school students’ perceptions of their learning.
 Dans la présente étude, les chercheurs examinent la validité d’un questionnaire évaluant les perceptions qu’ont les élèves de leur apprentissage autonome et collaboratif, avec et sans technologie, au sein d’un groupe d’élèves d’écoles intermédiaires canadiennes. Lee et ses collègues (2014) ont développé un questionnaire de 18 items pour évaluer les perceptions qu’ont des élèves d’écoles secondaires quant à leur apprentissage. Trois cent vingt élèves d’écoles intermédiaires à travers l’Alberta, au Canada, ont rempli le questionnaire. Les résultats d’une analyse factorielle confirmatoire ont révélé que le questionnaire avait été insuffisamment ajusté au modèle. Les chercheurs se sont servis d’une procédure de jackknife afin de supprimer systématiquement quatre items afin d’obtenir un questionnaire solide sur le plan psychométrique. Les résultats suggèrent que le questionnaire raccourci est un instrument utile pour l’auto-évaluation des perceptions qu’ont des élèves d’écoles intermédiaires quant à leur apprentissage.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Learning and TechnologySame topicInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207