MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307302859 · doi:10.52041/iase.icots11.t8a1

The Big Picture: A Family of Instruments for Understanding University-Level Statistics and Data Science Attitudes

2022· article· en· W4307302859 on OpenAlexaff
Alana Unfried, Douglas Whitaker, Leyla Batackci, Wendine Bolon, Marjorie Bond, April Kerby-Helm, Michael A. Posner

Bibliographic record

VenueBridging the Gap: Empowering and Educating Today’s Learners in Statistics. Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Teaching Statistics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistics Education and Methodologies
Canadian institutionsMount Saint Vincent University
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsScope (computer science)Expectancy theoryData scienceSet (abstract data type)Computer scienceBig dataValue (mathematics)Survey instrumentData setMathematics educationPsychologyStatisticsApplied psychologyMathematicsData miningSocial psychologyArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Attitudes matter in statistics and data science education, but previous instruments have been limited in scope, resulting in many unanswered questions. This paper discusses the Surveys of Motivational Attitudes toward Statistics and Data Science, a family of instruments designed to provide a broad understanding of university-level student and instructor attitudes as well as learning environment characteristics. Based on Expectancy Value Theory, a meta-model explains the interrelationships among the instruments, and an iterative design process is followed for survey development. Psychometric results from data collections using instruments developed thus far are presented. This is the first time a cohesive, synergistic set of instruments has been designed to work together to give a broader understanding of the state of statistics and data science education.

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.127
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.184

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.127
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0120.010
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.011
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.329
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.108 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBridging the Gap: Empowering and Educating Today’s Learners in Statistics. Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Teaching StatisticsSame topicStatistics Education and MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207