The Development of English Language Teaching Skills for Graduate Students through the Process of Learning by Doing
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 purposes of this investigation were 1) to examine the findings of effectiveness of the process of learning by doing conducted with 5 linguistic graduate students at Srinakharinwirot University, Bangkok, Thailand 2) to develop the linguistic graduate students skill of designing English teaching materials and teaching English language and 3) to find out the efficient format of learning by doing used for training the student teachers skill of teaching English. The subjects of the study were 5 graduate students majoring in Linguistics at Srinakharinwirot University. This investigation is a qualitative research. The research instrument was a questionnaire designed to ask the students’ opinions towards learning by doing of constructing English teaching materials and teaching English language of their own and their friends. The qualitative data from brainstorming in a group discussion were taken into account. The results showed that the students get the benefits from the process of learning by doing. It can assist them to discover the knowledge of designing English teaching materials and English teaching skill by themselves. It is also found out that the efficient format for training teaching skill of the student teachers should integrate with the activity of brainstorming in a group discussion in every teaching-learning step i.e. from the preparation step when the principles and teching techniques of language teaching input of Audio Lingual Method, Cognitive Code Learning Theory and Communicative Language Teahing Approach were presented, during the step of adaping teaching materials and experimenting the practical teaching in school as well as after the students completed their self reflection and peer reflection.
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 | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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