MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2619370426 · doi:10.5539/ies.v10n6p60

The Effectiveness of an Interactive Training Program in Developing a Set of Non-Cognitive Skills in Students at University of Petra

2017· article· en· W2619370426 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eman Gheith, Nahil M. Aljaberi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrit, Self-Efficacy, and Motivation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGritMindsetPsychologyCognitionEmpathySocial skillsCognitive skillSet (abstract data type)Medical educationMathematics educationSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of interactive training programs in developing a set of non-cognitive skills in students at the University of Petra. Furthermore, it sought to examine the impact of the sex, academic year, and university major variables on developing these skills in students who underwent the training program, as well as whether a correlation exists between the GPA of students in the experimental group and how they acquired these non-cognitive skills. The study focused on the following six non-cognitive skills: (a) locus of control; (b) planning; (c) empathy; (d) self-confidence; (e) growth mindset; and (f) grit. The study sample was randomly distributed into three groups: the first (Group A) attended an interactive training program; the second (B) attended a training course using a traditional teaching strategy; while the third (C) did not attend any programs whatsoever. The researchers have designed an interactive training program and a questionnaire to measure the sample’s non-cognitive skills on all six dimensions. The results indicate statistically significant differences between the different teaching methods used on all three groups (A, B, and C) in the overall test, as well as on three dimensions of empathy, growth mindset, and grit in favor of the experimental group (A). Additionally, findings have revealed no significant differences in the extent to which students in the experimental group (A) have acquired non-cognitive skills on the variables of sex, academic year, and university major. Moreover, the study did not show significant correlation between the extent to which students acquired these non-cognitive skills and their GPAs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.203
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.407 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicGrit, Self-Efficacy, and MotivationFrench-language works237,207