Development of reflective thinking through distance teacher education programs at AIOU Pakistan
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
<span style="line-height: 150%; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; mso-ascii-theme-font: major-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: major-bidi; mso-bidi-theme-font: major-bidi; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;">The current study aims to investigate the possibilities of developing reflective thinking among learners through distance education programs. The case of Allama Iqbal Open University (AIOU) Islamabad, Pakistan is examined to achieve this task. The study is based on Mezirow’s theory of reflective thinking, which divides thinking in four categories. The <em>Questionnaire of Reflective Thinking </em>(QRT) developed by Kember et al. (2000) based on Mezirow (1991) was administered to 450 AIOU students. The thinking and learning practices of students governed by their habitual actions, understanding, reflection, and critical reflection are statistically examined to meet the research objectives. Findings reveal that AIOU teacher education programs have a stronger tendency to promote understanding and reflective thinking among learners. The need to integrate content for developing critical reflection among learners is highlighted. The study also discovers the significant impacts of students’ job status and previous qualifications on their thinking patterns. <br /></span>
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 | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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