MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084852831 · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v21i3.4654

Applying the Rasch Model to Evaluate the Self-Directed Online Learning Scale (SDOLS) for Graduate Students

2020· article· en· W3084852831 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hongwei Yang, Jian Su, Kelly D. Bradley

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRasch modelPsychologyScale (ratio)CrowdsourcingOnline learningRating scaleDistance educationEducational technologyReliability (semiconductor)Computer scienceMedical educationMathematics educationMultimediaWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the rapid growth of online learning and the increased attention paid to student attrition in online programs, much research has been aimed at studying the effectiveness of online education to improve students’ online learning experience and student retention. Utilizing the online learning literature as a multi-faceted theoretical framework, the study developed and employed a new survey instrument. The Self-Directed Online Learning Scale (SDOLS) was used to examine graduate student perceptions of effectiveness of online learning environments as demonstrated by their ability to take charge of their own learning, and to identify key factors in instructional design for effective improvements. The study applied the Rasch rating scale model to evaluate and validate SDOLS through a psychometric lens to establish the reliability and validity of SDOLS. Results from Rasch analysis addressed two research questions. First, evidence was found to generally support the new instrument as being psychometrically sound but three problematic items were also identified as grounds for future improvement of SDOLS. Second, the study assessed the importance of various factors as measured by the SDOLS items in contributing to students’ ability to self-manage their own online learning. Finally, the new instrument is expected to contribute to the work of various stakeholders in online education and can serve to improve students’ online learning experience and effectiveness, increase online retention rates, and reduce online dropouts.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.806
Threshold uncertainty score0.800

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0040.003
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 head0.209
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations24
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed LearningSame topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207