The Impact of Student-Based Instruction on Improving IBT TOEFL Scores of Iranian Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>Student-based instruction is a form of collaborative education that students play an active role in learning the process. Student’s activity is in group forms. The teacher is presenting in class just to answer students’ questions. The paradigm and pattern shifting away from teaching to an emphasis on learning have persuaded power to be changed and moved from the teacher to the student. Being a qualitative research paper, it is an attempt to investigate the impact of student-based instruction on improving IBT scores of Iranian students. The participants of this study will include two groups of male and female students each consisting of 15, all of whom are enrolling in TOEFL classes in Kish English Institute in Tehran. The participants will be assigned to control (N=15) and experimental (N=15) groups. The participants in the experimental and control groups exposed to the same content, but a different instructional method. The participants are 30 students in Advance level in one class, male and female, aged 25-35 years old. SPSS and Independent T-test are used to measure hypothesis of research and to analyze data, respectively. According to the results of this investigation, student-based instruction significantly affects IBT TOEFL scores of students.</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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".