The Effect of Practical Presentations’ Strategy on the Achievement of the Ninth Graders Students of the Pre-Vocational Education Subject in Shobak District Schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present research was conducted to evaluate the effect of using practical presentations on the achievement of the ninth graders students in pre-vocational education subject in Shobak district schools, in comparison to the prevailing method, and identify whether there are differences attributed to the gender variable. To answer the questions, the study was applied to an experimental sample in two schools of Shobak district consisting of (46) male and female students from the ninth grade for the academic year 2015/2016, who studied the pre-vocational education by using the practical presentation method, and a control group in two schools consisting of (46) students studied by using the lecturing method. The results of the study showed statistically significant differences between mean scores of members of the two groups (the experimental),male and female and (the control), male and female in the post-test application in favor of the of the experimental group that used practical presentations. The results also showed the absence of statistically significant difference at the significance level (0.05) attributed to the gender variable in the achievement of the experimental group.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".