MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W113205317 · doi:10.5206/cie-eci.v39i1.9145

An Analysis of the Students’ Perceptions of Physics in Science Foundation Studies at the National University of Laos

2010· article· en· W113205317 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueComparative and International Education · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersStyrelsen för Internationellt Utvecklingssamarbete
KeywordsTest (biology)Work (physics)Foundation (evidence)Concept inventoryMathematics educationPedagogyLibrary sciencePsychologyEngineeringPolitical scienceComputer scienceMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the situation of physics teaching and learning at the Science Foundation Studies program at National University of Laos. The study has focused on the students’ understanding of concepts in mechanics, and the situation of the laboratory work activities. The research tools used in this study were the Force Concept Inventory test, interviews and questionnaires. The results show that in an international comparison the Lao students reveal a low level of conceptual understanding in mechanics. They also show no improvement in their conceptual understanding after teaching. The students have little experience of laboratory work. They had expectations that laboratory work would be an interesting part of Physics Foundation Studies Course. However, few of the students do get involved in the actual measurements and handling of equipment during the practical activities. So, many of them do not feel that they learn much physics through laboratory work. This corresponds to their teachers’ understandings as well. Some strategies for improving the above mentioned aspects of physics teaching based on physics education research will be suggested. Cet article présentera la situation des processus d’enseignement et d’apprentissage de la physique au sein des classes préparatoires scientifiques de l’Université Nationale du Laos. Le but de ces classes est que les étudiants comprennent les concepts de mécanique et la situation des activités de laboratoire. Afin de mener cette étude, nous avons utilisé le test Force Concept Inventory (Inventaire des Concepts de Force), mené des interviews et appliqué des questionnaires. Au niveau international, les résultats montrent que les étudiants laotiens ont un niveau bas de compréhension des concepts de mécanique. Ils montrent également que ces mêmes étudiants n’améliorent pas leur compréhension après avoir participé au cours. Les étudiants possèdent peu d’expérience en laboratoire. Ils s’attendaient à ce que le travail de laboratoire soit une partie intéressante des classes préparatoires. Cependant, peu d’étudiants s’impliquent vraiment dans les mesures et dans la manipulation de l’équipement pendant les sessions de pratique. La plupart d’entre eux pensent donc ne pas apprendre grand-chose en physique pendant les pratiques de laboratoire. Cette sensation est également partagée par les professeurs. Notre objectif est donc de proposer quelques stratégies d’enseignement, soutenues par les recherches effectuées dans le domaine de l’enseignement de la physique.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.246
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.240
GPT teacher head0.561
Teacher spread0.321 · 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