Assessing Quranic Reading Proficiency in the j-QAF Programme
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In its effort to provide solid religious foundation for Muslim students, the Ministry of Education Malaysia has launched a national religious literacy initiative known as the j-QAF Programme in 2004. This programme has since been implemented in public primary schools throughout the country and incorporated as a part of the curriculum of studies. The programme includes a wide range of basic religious skills including recitation of the Quran, the learning of the Jawi script and Arabic language as well as the basics of worship. After several years of its implementation, much concern is raised on the effectiveness of this programme in achieving its objectives. Thus, this preliminary paper aims to shed some light on this matter. Specifically, it focuses on analyzing the aspect of Quranic recitation skill, which constitutes one of the core subjects of the programme. A Quran reading test was administered to selected respondents in one of the schools, and the results were analyzed through descriptive statistical methods. The findings indicate the level of proficiency of the students in mastering the skill of Quranic recitation and its possible implication and reflection on the overall effectiveness of the programme.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".