MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2787322887 · doi:10.5539/jel.v7n3p41

Use of the Movies in the Turkish Language and Literature Education in Turkey

2018· article· en· W2787322887 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Halide Ince Yakar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFilm in Education and Therapy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurkishPsychologyMathematics educationContent analysisSelection (genetic algorithm)PedagogyEducational researchSociologyComputer scienceLinguisticsSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of the present research is to investigate the teachers’ use of movies in their classes for the teaching of literature and their opinions on this technique. The research is designed as a case study. The target group of the research, selected on information-oriented sampling, consists of 44 Turkish Language and Literature teachers who graduated from 27 different Turkish universities and work in education centers, state and foundation schools and enrolled in Okan University pedagogical formation program. The responses given to the open-ended questionnaire items prepared by the researcher are interpreted qualitatively by means of content analysis. The data obtained from the research are interpreted under the categories of (1) the movies used in the classroom, (2) the purpose for which the movie is used in the classroom, (3) the selection of movies according to literary genres, (4) benefits of the educational movies for research group, (5) limitations of the educational movies for research group. Depending on the research results, some recommendations are made for the use of movies in the classroom.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.400 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicFilm in Education and TherapyFrench-language works237,207