EXPLORING INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN THE IMPACT OF WEB-BASED LEARNING TOOLS (WBLTS)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explore individual differences in middle and secondary school student attitudes and learning performance regarding Web-Based Learning Tools (WBLTs). The student characteristics assessed were gender, age, computer comfort level, subject comfort level, and average grade. Attitudes toward WBLTs were measured using a reliable, valid survey designed to gather data on student perceptions of learning, design, and engagement. Learning performance was assessed by comparing pre- and post-test scores on four knowledge categories (remembering, understanding, application, analysis) based on the revised Bloom’s taxonomy. Female students had significantly more positive attitudes toward WBLTs. Students who were more comfortable with using computers and the subject area addressed by a WBLT had significantly more positive attitudes toward WBLTs. Average grade was unrelated to student attitudes toward WBLTs. Student age was the only student characteristic that was significantly associated with learning performance. When older students use WBLTs (different from those used by younger students), learning performance is significantly greater than younger students. It is speculated that WBLTs may be better suited toward older students who have better self-regulation skills.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it