The Practice and Challenges of Implementing Critical Thinking Skills in Omani Post-basic EFL Classrooms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the current study is to investigate post-basic English teachers` practice of critical thinking skills and the challenges they face while teaching skills in EFL classrooms. Three research questions were investigated to achieve this purpose: 1-To what extent do EFL teachers use classroom behaviors that nurture critical thinking at the post basic education schools? 2- Does EFL teachers’ practice of classroom behaviors that nurture critical thinking skills vary according to gender? 3-What challenges do EFL teachers face when incorporating critical thinking in their classrooms?The sample was drawn from 12 post basic schools: 3 female schools, 3 male schools and 6 mixed gender schools. The total number of grade 11 and 12 English teachers in these schools is thirty: 15 males and 15 females. To accomplish the objectives and fulfill the purpose of the study, the study employed a questionnaire and an observation form to collect the data needed to answer the research questions. On looking at the post-basic EFL teachers’ use of behaviors nurturing critical thinking skills, the study reveals that post-basic English teachers rarely use the behaviors that nurture critical thinking skills. The findings also show no significant difference between males and females in the use of the behaviors that most nurture critical thinking skills, except for one type of behavior. Moreover, the study results report some challenges that EFL teachers face when teaching critical thinking; these are related to the course book, to extra-curricular activities, to class size and to training.
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 | 0.007 | 0.048 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".