A Study of Effect of Dramatic Activities on Improving English Communicative Speaking Skill of Grade 11th Students
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
<p>This paper aimed to reexamine the current EFL communicative speaking skill in high school level in Thailand due to the coming of the entry to ASEAN at the end of the year 2015. Thai students need to be wellprepared for workforce in the future since English is used as the working language in ASEAN. The purposes of this paper were to study the effect of dramatic activities on improving English communicative skills of grade 11<sup>th</sup> participants and to examine students’ opinions towards the use of dramatic activities in their speaking class. The duration of experiment was 21 hours within 7 weeks. The research instruments were lesson plans using dramatic activities, English communicative speaking test and a questionnaire measuring students’ opinions towards the teaching based on dramatic activities. The findings were that the English communicative speaking skill on grade 11<sup>th</sup> students after attending the teaching class using dramatic activities was significantly higher than before attending the teaching and the students’ opinions towards dramatic activities on speaking were highly positive.</p>
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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