The Philosophy of Learning and Listening in Traditional Classroom and Online Learning Approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is important to consider the concepts of traditional classroom and online learning in evaluating effective learning and listening conducted in higher learning institutions. To reach the depth of both concepts, one should understand them in the philosophical point of view. Both traditional classroom and online learning play a role in the learning process. It was investigated by many researchers before and important findings had been revealed. Both play different roles. There are researchers who came out with blended learning as the solution. However, many other factors need to be considered. This study has defined several objectives to investigate the type of learning that can provide high achievement within the students and to determine whether there is any significant difference in metacognitive awareness listening strategies students used in learning listening online and learning listening in a traditional classroom. This study was conducted in Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia (USIM), a local university in Negeri Sembilan. This university is located in Nilai, Negeri Sembilan. 44 students were selected (22 in control group, 22 in experimental group) from the Syariah and Law Faculty as participants of the research. From the pre-test, the student’s level of proficiency was the same. After determining on what type of instruments and data analysis procedure to be used, the researcher compared the data using t-test. In listening strategies, based on the findings, there is no significant difference between two groups of approach. The students use the same strategy either online classroom or traditional classroom. It differs on the type of strategy used, but the frequency of applying the strategy between two groups is the same. Because the result showed that traditional classroom performed better result than online, it might have been something wrong with the courseware used by the teacher. The lack of instruction provided by the teacher might be why the students in online learning could not perform in the listening task.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.035 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".