MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2237663441 · doi:10.5539/ass.v12n2p93

Analysis of Engineering Students’ Responses to Flipped Classroom Methodology in the United Arab Emirates

2016· article· en· W2237663441 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlipped classroomRelevance (law)Dimension (graph theory)PsychologyMathematics educationComputer-assisted web interviewingFlipped learningMedical educationInstitutionSociologyMedicinePolitical scienceMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>The aim of this study was to analyse student responses to the introduction of flipped learning methodology at an institution of higher education in the northern region of the United Arab Emirates to identify potential relationships between and among the responses and to determine underlying factors guiding the responses. A survey questionnaire was developed by a team of faculty and sent to students via online survey software. The analysis employed dimension reduction techniques to ascertain underlying factors guiding responses. Two major factors were identified: (1) the focus on educational benefits of the methodology and (2) the instructional relevance of the flipped classroom approach. The study concluded that flipped learning methodology can be useful for improving learning and holds the potential to more adequately engage today’s learners. </p>

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 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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.680
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.016
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.327 · 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