MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168805292 · doi:10.5539/elt.v4n4p49

The Impact of Concept Mapping on EFL Learners' Critical Thinking Ability

2011· article· en· W2168805292 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ebrahim Khodadady, Afsaneh Ghanizadeh

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language Teaching · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Critical Thinking Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCritical thinkingMathematics educationReading (process)Construct (python library)Control (management)Concept mapCritical readingLinguisticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study investigated the influence of concept mapping as a post-reading strategy on EFL learners' critical thinking ability. The study utilized a pretest – posttest control and experimental group design. To do so, thirty six EFL learners at upper intermediate and advanced levels were randomly assigned to experimental (n=18) and control (n=18) groups. The results of pretest indicated that the participants of the two groups were homogenous with regard to their proficiency level and critical thinking ability. The experimental group was instructed to construct concept maps after reading each text and formulated the required post-reading activities on the basis of the constructed maps. Critical thinking skill was assessed via the

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.234
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.320 · 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.

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

Citations30
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Language TeachingSame topicEducation and Critical Thinking DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207