MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1784476054 · doi:10.5430/jct.v4n1p167

Ghanaian Junior High School Science Teachers’ Knowledge of Contextualised Science Instruction

2015· article· en· W1784476054 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ernest Ngman-Wara

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Teaching · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicScience Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChristian ministryCurriculumTest (biology)Mathematics educationDescriptive statisticsScience educationPsychologyPedagogyPolitical scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of the study was to investigate Junior High School science teachers’ knowledge about contextualisedscience instruction. The study employed descriptive survey design to collect data. A test, Test of Science TeacherKnowledge of Contextualised Science Instruction was developed and administered to collect data on teachers’knowledge of contextualised science instruction from 204(180 males and 24 females) Junior High School scienceteachers. Descriptive and correlational data analyses were performed on the data collected. Some key findings thatemerged in the study were: Majority of the teachers’ knowledge about contextualised science instruction was weakbut correlated positively and significantly with their highest professional qualification. A number ofrecommendations were made to the Ministry of education and Ghana Education Service: A policy statement shouldbe made in the curriculum to indicate that science teaching should be contextualised. Another policy should befashioned to compel institutions that train science teachers to include contextualisation of science instruction in theirscience methodology courses.

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 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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.443
Threshold uncertainty score0.938

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations10
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Curriculum and TeachingSame topicScience Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207