MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036877151 · doi:10.5539/jel.v9n4p49

Investigation of Physical Education and Sports Students’ Attitudes Towards E-Learning

2020· article· en· W3036877151 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tuncay Öktem

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender and Technology in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoachingPhysical educationTurkishPsychologyContext (archaeology)Medical educationMathematics educationDescriptive statisticsPopulationData collectionSample (material)Test (biology)PedagogyMedicineMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study aimed to investigate the attitudes of university students who have received sports education towards E-learning. Quantitative research model was applied in the research. The population of the study consisted of 315 students who were selected via random sampling method, at Bayburt University School of Physical Education and Sports. The e-learning attitude scale which was developed by Wilkinson, Roberts and While (2010) and adapted to Turkish by Haznedar and Baran (2012) was used in the study. The data were analyzed through SPSS 22 package program. For descriptive data analysis; ANOVA and Independent Sample T test were applied. The result of the one-way analysis of variance showed that the Physical Education Teaching and Sports Management departments had higher scores than the Coaching Department. In this context, according to the results obtained from the research, it can be said that Coaching Department had lower score than the other two departments because of the fact that there were more courses requiring technical skills compared to the Physical Education Teaching and Sports Management departments.

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)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.330 · 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicGender and Technology in EducationFrench-language works237,207