MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400002946 · doi:10.1111/test.12374

The <scp>VSSL</scp> scale: A brief instructor tool for assessing students' perceived value of software to learning statistics

2024· article· en· W4400002946 on OpenAlexaff
Udi Alter, Carmen Dang, Zachary J. Kunicki, Alyssa Counsell

Bibliographic record

VenueTeaching Statistics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistics Education and Methodologies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScale (ratio)StatisticsValue (mathematics)Computer scienceMathematics educationSoftwarePsychologyMathematicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The biggest difference in statistical training from previous decades is the increased use of software. However, little research examines how software impacts learning statistics. Assessing the value of software to statistical learning demands appropriate, valid, and reliable measures. The present study expands the arsenal of tools by reporting on the psychometric properties of the Value of Software to Statistical Learning (VSSL) scale in an undergraduate student sample. We propose a brief measure with strong psychometric support to assess students' perceived value of software in an educational setting. We provide data from a course using SPSS, given its wide use and popularity in the social sciences. However, the VSSL is adaptable to any statistical software, and we provide instructions for customizing it to suit alternative packages. Recommendations for administering, scoring, and interpreting the VSSL are provided to aid statistics instructors and education researchers understand how software influences students' statistical learning.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.371 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTeaching StatisticsSame topicStatistics Education and MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207