MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048844752 · doi:10.5430/wje.v5n1p94

The Power of Reflective Writing for Early Childhood Teachers in Palestine

2015· article· en· W2048844752 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Buad Mohamed Khales

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Education · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReflective Practices in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPalestineReflective thinkingReflective writingPsychologyJournal writingReflective practicePower (physics)Qualitative researchPedagogyMathematics educationTeaching methodSociologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research aimed to highlight the power of reflective writing for early childhood teachers in Palestine, seventeachers in Palestine participated in this qualitative study, they were asked to write their reflections for 18 months.Data was gathered using semi-structured interviews and reflective writing journals. Data was analyzed usingthematic analysis approach in order to determine the possible effects of using reflective writing with teachers ondeveloping their reflective thinking. The results of the study indicated that reflective writing was capable ofdeveloping teachers’ reflective thinking and helped them to change their attitudes toward themselves and empowerthem as well.

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)0.004
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.421
Threshold uncertainty score0.766

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.381 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of EducationSame topicReflective Practices in EducationFrench-language works237,207