MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383893282 · doi:10.36510/learnland.v16i1.1098

Theories of Motivation to Support the Needs of All Learners

2023· article· en· W4383893282 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Diane Montgomery, Matthew Montgomery, Molly Montgomery

Bibliographic record

VenueLEARNing Landscapes · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational and Psychological Assessments
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityAlgonquin CollegeUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPleaMathematics educationPsychologySelf-determination theoryPedagogyAutonomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing number of students requiring special education support is a plea for students to be taught the way they learn best. Through the authentic educational experiences of a diverse family, this paper explores the impact of theories of motivation to support all learners. This exploration proposes that educators may be able to support the needs of all learners in inclusive classrooms by integrating the theories of self-efficacy, self-determination, and implicit theories of intelligence.

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)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLEARNing LandscapesSame topicEducational and Psychological AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207