MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Development of Service Learning Instructional Model for Pre-Service Teachers.

2013· article· en· W2060795866 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Parichart Prasertsang, Prasart Nuangchalerm

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher education of social science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicService-Learning and Community Engagement
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationContext (archaeology)Class (philosophy)Service-learningService (business)Process (computing)Presentation (obstetrics)Cluster samplingComputer scienceInstructional designPsychologyTest (biology)PedagogySociologyArtificial intelligencePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research aimed to develop a service learning instructional model and to study the use of the developed service model. The research was conducted through a methodology and development process, which was divided into three phases. In phase 1, a study into the existing context and needs of the community, concepts, theories, and related research on the development of service learning instructional model was done. As part of the phase-one study, a people forum attended by the students and the locals was organized. The data gained from the forum was used to synthesize the model. In phase 2, a tentative model of the service learning instruction was constructed. In phase three, the actual use of the developed model with the pre-service teachers who were second year students enrolled in a course “Source of Knowledge and Local Wisdoms” during semester 2 of the academic year 2012 was studied. Seventy-four students were sampled through Cluster Sampling, and the data was analyzed through behavior comparison assessed by t-test Dependent Samples. The results of the research revealed that the elements of the service learning instructional model included principles, concepts, theories related to service learning instruction, aims of the model, teaching process, social system, responses, and support system. In addition, the results of the actual use of the developed model unveiled the four stages of the model which is called “PCAR Model”  P-Preparation, C-Class Presentation, A-Activity Based Learning, and R-Reflective Thinking. The teaching and learning activities enable the students to be responsible for the society and to perceive self-capabilities. Key words : Service learning instruction; Social responsibility; Perception of self-efficacy

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.420
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.305 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher education of social scienceSame topicService-Learning and Community EngagementFrench-language works237,207