MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038774691 · doi:10.4256/ijmtl.v21i2.253

Epistemic and Mathematical Beliefs of Exemplary Statistics Teachers

2020· article· en· W3038774691 on OpenAlexaff
Douglas Whitaker

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Mathematics Teaching and Learning · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational Strategies and Epistemologies
Canadian institutionsMount Saint Vincent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstruct (python library)PsychologyAffect (linguistics)Mathematics educationTeacher educationSample (material)Statistics educationStatisticsMathematicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Education research has established that teachers' beliefs matter because they can affect classroom practices and student outcomes, and beliefs are viewed as an important construct within statistics education. However, relatively little research about the beliefs of in-service statistics teachers has been conducted. Additionally, little research has been conducted with highly-experienced statistics teachers rather than pre-service teachers or typical teachers. Using two survey instruments, this study describes the beliefs about knowledge and beliefs about mathematical problem-solving for a sample of exemplary statistics teachers. The exemplary statistics teachers in this study responded to the Epistemic Beliefs Inventory and the Indiana Mathematics Belief Scales. Results show that the exemplary statistics teachers in this study had mature epistemic beliefs and strongly positive beliefs toward mathematical problem-solving, but notable patterns of similar responses that run counter to these trends were observed and are discussed.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.199
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueInternational Journal for Mathematics Teaching and LearningSame topicEducational Strategies and EpistemologiesFrench-language works237,207