The Effects of 5E Inquiry Learning Activities on Achievement and Attitude toward Chemistry
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 purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of 5E inquiry learning activities on students’ achievement, attitude toward chemistry. A non-equivalent control group design was used to the quasi-experimental research in this study. A total of 34 (8 males and 26 females) undergraduates in Turkey voluntarily participated in the study. The 5E Inquiry Learning Activities were applied to the experimental group and lecture-based traditional activities were applied to the control group. The both two groups were taught by the same instructor and used same books. The Chemical Equilibrium Concept Test (CECT) and the Attitude toward the Subject of Chemistry Inventory (ASCI) were applied to both groups as pre-test and post-test. The results of the study revealed that 5E inquiry learning activities were more effective in improving the achievement in chemical equilibrium compared to lecture-based traditional activities. In addition, the results showed that there was no statistically significant mean difference between experimental and control groups with respect to attitude toward chemistry.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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