MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307961728 · doi:10.5430/jct.v11n8p134

Determinants of Teacher's Attitude towards Online Teaching and Learning

2022· article· en· W4307961728 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Poonam Punia, Anupma Sangwan, Anurag Sangwan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Teaching · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology-Enhanced Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCronbach's alphaPsychologyScale (ratio)Reliability (semiconductor)Mathematics educationPositive attitudeHigher educationPedagogyMedical educationSocial psychologyPsychometricsMedicineDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Faculty attitude is an important aspect in determining their readiness for online education. This study seeks to understand the attitude of teachers in higher education regarding online teaching and learning. There were 759 participants from different colleges and universities in India (92 professors, 73 associate professors, and 594 assistant professors). This study was completed during the lockdown owing to Covid-19 outbreak. After reviewing relevant literature, data was initially gathered using Google forms based on the "Attitude Scale towards Online Teaching and Learning for Higher Education Teachers". Scale reliability was verified with the Cronbach Alpha and split-half reliability. Interrelationships between the constructs of attitude were examined using PLS-SEM. The study also revealed the existence of parallel and serial mediations between the constructs. It was established that knowledge could lead to responsiveness only in the presence of appreciation and proficiency. Hence, appreciation and proficiency are important constructs for teachers' responsiveness towards online 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Curriculum and TeachingSame topicTechnology-Enhanced Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207