MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1534856007 · doi:10.51724/ijpce.v4i1.92

Impact of Audio-Visual Aids on Senior High School Students’ Achievement in Physics

2012· article· en· W1534856007 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Physics & Chemistry Education · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicVisual and Cognitive Learning Processes
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAudio visualMathematics educationPsychologyPhysicsComputer scienceMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was aimed at finding out the impact audio-visual-aided instruction on students’ achievement in physics at Cape Coast township of Cape Coast Metropolis, Ghana. The study was a non-randomized pre-test/post-test group design. A total of 65 students in Senior High School (SHS) formed the sample for the study. The students were fourth year science students from two purposefully selected co-educational SHS. The two selected schools were randomly designated experimental and control groups respectively. A validated physics achievement test instrument of a reliability coefficient of 0.76 was administered. Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) and t-test statistics were used to test the two hypotheses formulated to guide the study at a significance level 0.05. The results showed that SHS students taught with audio-visual aided instruction performed better than those taught with traditional method. The mean achievement scores of both male and female students improved significantly by the use of the audio-visual aided instruction. It was therefore recommended that SHS physics teachers should explore the use of audio-visual-aided instruction to teach the subject, physics.

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)0.000
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 score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.404 · 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