MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3185571688 · doi:10.5539/ies.v14n8p67

Investigating University Students’ Views on Distance Education at Associate Degree Level

2021· article· en· W3185571688 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEducation Practices and Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLikert scalePsychologyScale (ratio)PopulationVocational educationTest (biology)Descriptive statisticsMathematics educationMedical educationSocial psychologyPedagogySociologyStatisticsDevelopmental psychologyMedicineMathematicsDemographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study aimed to determine the associate degree students’ views on the dimensions of personal suitability, effectiveness, teaching, and predisposition towards teaching offered in distance education environments and examine whether their views differed significantly according to gender, class, and vocational school type. The data of the study were collected from 2061 students studying in vocational schools of a state university located in eastern Turkey. All students in the study population were aimed to be reached; however, 2061 out of 2963 students who participated voluntarily and answered all the questions were included. Among these 2061 students, 1152 were male and 909 were female. When classified according to school type, 1429 participants were studying at vocational schools, 401 at health, 136 at justice, and 95 were studying at tourism. Learners’ Views on Distance Education Scale (LVoDE) was used as the data collection tool. LVODE included 18 items and four factors as personal appropriateness, effectiveness, informativeness and predisposition. The scale was on 5-point Likert rating scale ranging from 1 to 5 indicating 1 (never agree), 2 (rarely agree), 3 (sometimes agree), 4 (usually agree), 5 (always agree). The reliability coefficients of the scale including four sub-dimensions as personal suitability, effectiveness, teaching, and predisposition varied between .81 and .91. The descriptive statistics were used to ascertain the opinions on the sub-dimensions of personal appropriateness, effectiveness, informativeness and predisposition offered to students in distance education environments. A factorial ANOVA test was performed for independent samples to check whether students’ views on teaching offered in distance education settings differed significantly according to gender, grade level, and type of school. According to the research results, it was noticed that the students did not find themselves sufficient for distance education activities in terms of personal convenience and effectiveness and thought that face-to-face education was more effective than distance education. They regarded themselves insufficient in completing their homework and similar tasks given during their online classes by teachers. There was no significant difference in views of the students upon distance education in terms of both gender and grade levels. However, a significant difference was found in their views on distance education according to the types of vocational schools. The opinions of the students studying in health and justice vocational schools were found to be at a more positive level than the ones enrolled in hotel and tourism vocational schools.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.516
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.417
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.009 · 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