Measurement Dimensions for Arabic Language Teachers in Malaysia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arabic language education in Malaysia has been considered unsuccessful. Therefore, Arabic language teachers as the main factor behind the success of school education system need to be transformed via a preparation, construction and evaluation of teacher quality. Hanna and Gimbert (2011) proposed three major initiatives in teacher quality evaluation beginning with identifying the dimensions in teacher quality. Subsequently, this paper has set upon two objectives, namely (a) to study the dimensions of teacher quality among the scholars, and (b) to identify the best dimensions for quality measurement of Arabic language teachers. The two objectives were achieved through a descriptive qualitative research via literature review of the views and works of previous scholars. A thematic approach was employed in the filtering process and data analysis with the help of Altas.ti version 7.1 software. Results of the study found that a diversity of teacher quality dimensions had been used in most of previous researches namely, teacher qualification, teacher characteristics, and in-class practice teaching effectiveness. This study has also identified a framework proposal for quality measurement dimensions for Arabic language teachers. In addition, this working paper also suggests a further study to complete the dimension framework proposal together with several aspects which need to be emphasized.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".