Research on teachers’ needs when using e-textbooks in teaching
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
The major purposes of this study were to understand teachers’ definitions of e-textbooks, to identify teachers’ needs when using e-textbooks and to explore the relationships between teachers’ needs of using e-textbooks and teachers’ attributes. To achieve these major purposes, an open questionnaire was proposed to experts to obtain their requirements of using e-textbooks. A needs of using e-textbooks perception scale (NUEPS) was then constructed based on teacher interview results, the literature review and the results of the open questionnaire mentioned above. In the formal study, 378 elementary and secondary school teachers were selected to complete NUEPS, and the reliability and validity of the scale were checked. The results indicated that the teachers’ needs when using e-textbooks comprised three factors: (1) to support teaching activities (STA); (2) to support reading and presentation (SRP); and (3) to support learning activities and parental interaction (LAPI). Besides, the findings of the study showed that the Taiwanese school teachers’ perceptions of using e-textbooks were positive in average. There were no significant differences in terms of gender and age, but there were differences regarding teachers’ school level, and application experience in both the STA and SRP sub-dimensions. The results of this study can be used to offer a better understanding of teachers’ needs of using e-textbooks, and to help novice teachers’ application in e-textbook.
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 | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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