Investigating Teachers’ Views of Student-Centred Learning Approach
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
Conventional learning is based on low levels of students’ participation where students are rarely expected to ask questions or to challenge the theories of the academic. A paradigm shift in curriculum has resulted in implementing student-centred learning (SCL) approach, putting students as the centre of the learning process. This mode of presentation has been implemented in the Malaysian classroom context. However, the shift in focus on learning from the conventional to the SCL has presented Malaysian educators with some challenges especially to move away from the ‘chalk and talk’ method of teaching used for decades in most classrooms in secondary schools. This study explores teachers’ views of SCL approach through individual in-depth interviews. Various themes emerged from the interviews. The findings provides evidence that teachers who exposed students to some elements of SCL, saw students actively engaged in the learning process, aware of their own responsibilities, sense of autonomy inlearning and learned from their experiences. However, there were some challenges and constraints faced by teachers in implementing SCL approach.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it