MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160934534 · doi:10.5539/ies.v8n3p159

Content Analysis of Jordanian Elementary Textbooks during 1970–2013 as Case Study

2015· article· en· W2160934534 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eman Rasmi Abed, Mohammad M. Al-Absi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Assessment and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAl-Balqa' Applied University
KeywordsMathematics educationElementary mathematicsPresentation (obstetrics)Content analysisMathematicsQuality (philosophy)Computer scienceSocial scienceSociologyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to determine types of mathematic disciplines (in term of topics) in Jordanian Elementary textbooks. This study evaluates mathematics text books especially in the period between 1970 and 2013 and identifies types and quantities of mathematics. To examine the relative quantity of mathematics, branches of mathematics, presentation means, and methods, books were analyzed using content analysis protocols. As a result, this work has shown a significant increase in mathematics enhancement in terms of quality and quantity in Jordanian elementary textbook. Such enhancement is relevant to the advantage of new technology based on mathematical algorithms. In addition, this research has pointed out the growth in geometry while numbers of mathematics show a decline in return as of 2013. Based on this study the recommendation concluded is to further develop textbooks in order to meet NCTM requirements.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0130.018
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.322
GPT teacher head0.537
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicEducational Assessment and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207