MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403558083 · doi:10.5539/hes.v14n4p153

A Development of Online Problem-Based Learning Model to Promote Self-Regulated Learning among Undergraduates

2024· article· en· W4403558083 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Narumon Rodniam, Damp Suksuwanont

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationPsychologySelf-regulated learningProblem-based learningEducational technologyIndependent studyTeaching methodMedical educationComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research aimed to develop and evaluate an online problem-based learning (PBL) model to enhance undergraduates' self-regulated learning (SRL). The Research and Development method was used in two phases: the first was to develop and validate the model. It began with a literature review to identify core features of effective PBL and SRL within an online environment, then set a concept framework and create the model manually. Seven experts were reviewed following the model, and it was piloted for further optimization. Second, the model will be implemented and evaluated with a sample of 52 students at Thailand National Sports University, Chumphon Campus. The main instruments used were the developed model, the model quality questionnaire, SRL assessments (pre- and post-), and after-action review forms. The results showed that (1) a developed model consisting of four sections: orientation of the model, the model of instruction, application, and student outcomes. Six core components: authentic problems, online collaborative learning, self-regulated learning, instructional scaffolding, online learning resources, and authentic assessments, which are organized through three main processes: preparation, implementation of SRL strategies, and summative assessment, and all activities using an iterative learning three stages: meeting the problem and planning, doing and checking, and presenting the result and reflecting. Experts agreed on the quality of this model, which was excellent. (M= 4.61, SD=0.52). (2) Average SRL score was significantly higher after learning with this model compared to prior us (p<0.01, large effect size; d=1.03). The findings of this study support the developed model that can improve the students' SRL effectiveness. Overall, the students agreed that an instructor plays a critical role in developing their SRL and problem-solving skills. The students demonstrated more self-assurance and were apt to use this method to learn other subjects.

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)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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 venueHigher Education StudiesSame topicInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207