MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400392956 · doi:10.23977/aetp.2024.080427

Theoretical Basis Related to English Autonomous Learning of My PhD Dissertation Research

2024· article· en· W4400392956 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Educational Technology and Psychology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCentral South University of Forestry and TechnologyCentral South University
KeywordsBasis (linear algebra)PsychologyMathematics educationCognitive scienceComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

My PhD dissertation research topic is "The Impact of Motivation Cultivation on English Autonomous Learning among University Students in Hunan, China-A Mediating Role of Learning Strategy", so the dependable variable of my topic is "English autonomous learning". Through reviewing the literature about theories, I figured out such theories as theory of self-instruction, theory of cognitive psychology and theory of constructivism psychology have laid very solid foundation for the research and development of theories of English autonomous learning. The rise and development of the above theories have laid a solid theoretical foundation for the research on the theory and practice of autonomous learning, and studied the basic attributes of autonomous learning, psychological wit, influencing factors of autonomous learning and the cultivation strategies of learners' autonomous learning ability from different perspectives, thus promoting the research and further development of autonomous learning theory intoguiding practice. This paper will explore the above three theories one by one in detail.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.011
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.387 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Educational Technology and PsychologySame topicEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningFrench-language works237,207