MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122207570 · doi:10.21083/ajote.v1i1.1586

Improving achievements of pupils with learning and behavior problems with co-operative teaching strategy in Aboh, Delta State, Nigeria

2011· article· en· W2122207570 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ngozi O. Obiyo

Bibliographic record

VenueAfrican Journal of Teacher Education · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Technology Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumMathematics educationTest (biology)PsychologyStatistical significanceIntervention (counseling)Control (management)Teaching methodExperimental researchDevelopmental psychologyPedagogyMathematicsStatisticsComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of the study was to determine the effects of cooperative teaching on children with learning and behavioral problems. Determining the most effective intervention for children with learning and behavioral problems has continued to challenge educators. For this the study sought to find out how co-operative teaching will improve the achievements of pupils with learning and behavior problems in Aboh, Delta State, Nigeria. A research question and a hypothesis tested at 0.05 level of significance was used to guide the study. The research design was true experimental. Two groups of children were used for the study .The sample consisted of 64 primaries four and five pupils .From the study, it was found out that Experimental Group had higher mean of 76.06 against Control Group with mean of 53.84 and standard deviation of 19.2. The hypothesis was tested using t-test and showed that the performance of the experimental group was significantly higher than that of the control group. It is therefore recommended that this strategy should be included in the school curriculum for children with learning and behavior problems.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.470
Threshold uncertainty score0.490

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAfrican Journal of Teacher EducationSame topicEducation and Technology IntegrationFrench-language works237,207