A Study on the Rationale of Social Media Use by the Students of King Khalid University
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
s not it deplorable that in a country that tops in the entire world in using several social media sites does not utilize the same media in acquiring knowledge and skills? In Saudi Arabia, undergraduate students spend a significant amount of time on social media every day, but they are reluctant (or not motivated enough) to use the same media for educational purposes. This study was carried out on the undergraduate English majors of King Khalid University in Muhayil Asir in Saudi Arabia. In the English department, every student carries at least one smart phone with Internet connection, and they are found occupied with their phones on the campus, sometimes even in classrooms, but they are weak both in subject knowledge and skills of English language. The teachers-cum-researchers were baffled with students’ competence because regular users of Internet and social media are supposed to be updated with the subject knowledge as well as confident in using English language. The researchers designed an empirical study to explore students’ rationale of using the social media and their language preference. The study concludes with gloomy findings that students use the media mainly for entertainment and ineffective communication in English language. The worst fact is: they are not motivated enough to use the social media for educational purposes.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it