MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134644701 · doi:10.30979/rev.abeno.v21i1.1195

Report of an experience: self-study to foster self-regulated learning for International Dental Degree Program (IDDP) students in Canada

2021· article· pt· W3134644701 on OpenAlexaffabout
Renata Grazziotin‐Soares, P. Doig, Diego Machado Ardenghi

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista da ABENO · 2021
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicProblem and Project Based Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesDegree programPsychologyPedagogyMathematics educationPhilosophyMedical educationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Este artigo objetivou descrever brevemente uma experiência com a metodologia de estudo autônomo realizada no Programa de Graduação Internacional de Odontologia (IDDP) em uma Universidade no Canadá. Esta abordagem encorajou o aprendizado autorregulado dos estudantes. Devido à pandemia COVID-19 as aulas “on-site” da faculdade de odontologia foram descontinuadas. Os estudantes do programa IDDP eram permitidos frequentar o prédio da faculdade somente para realizar as atividades pré-clínicas (e eram supervisionados por apenas um professor de cada vez). Como a turma de 2020 do programa IDDP era pequena (2 alunos), o diretor do programa e os professores consideraram que o estudo autônomo seria uma ideia apropriada. Percebeu-se que os estudantes tiveram sucesso em autorregular o aprendizado. Como por exemplo: usaram suas anotações, monitoraram a compreensão do material teórico disponibilizado, fizeram perguntas etc. A experiência com os estudantes do programa IDDP mostrou que a oportunidade de estudo autônomo se caracterizou como um ambiente favorável para os professores usarem nas disciplinas pré-clínicas.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.340
Threshold uncertainty score0.685

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista da ABENOSame topicProblem and Project Based LearningFrench-language works237,207