MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307252810 · doi:10.32996/bjtep.2022.1.3.5

Teacher Candidates’ Self-Determined Motivation to Develop and Implement Self-Regulated Learning Practices

2022· article· en· W4307252810 on OpenAlexaffabout
Charlotte Ann Brenner

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Teacher Education and Pedagogy · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSelf-regulated learningAffordancePsychologyMathematics educationClass (philosophy)Perspective (graphical)Self-determination theoryPedagogyComputer scienceAutonomyArtificial intelligenceCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Teaching towards self-regulated learning (SRL) is complex and involves the development of skills and sustained motivation. This study examined teacher candidates’ (TCs’) identification of supports and constraints for their self-determined motivation to develop SRL practices. Findings from one case within a qualitative, longitudinal study of four teacher candidates enrolled in a teacher education program (TEP) focused on SRL in Canada are presented. Supports and constraints for this TC’s self-determined motivation in relation to her development and implementation of self-regulated promoting practices are identified and discussed from the perspective of SRL and self-determination theory. The data analyzed included: a questionnaire, interviews, documents, and in-class observations. The finding reveals detailed descriptive codes and categories for SRL and management practices, as well as codes related to TCs’ motivational constraints and affordances for their development of SRL practices.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.378 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Teacher Education and PedagogySame topicInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207