The Linguistic Enlightenment Level of Eleventh (11th) Grade Students in Jordan and its Relationship with Some Variables
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study aimed at identifying the linguistic enlightenment level of eleventh 11th grade students in Jordan. The study’s sample consisted from two hundred (200) female and male students who were selected through using the random stratification method from Al-Karak public schools at Jordan. In order to fulfill the study’s objectives, the researchers of the current study prepared a multiple - choice objective test that consisted from fifty (50) items. Each item includes four (4) choices. Those items cover three linguistic systems of Arabic: the syntactic, morphological and semantic systems. The study’s results showed that students showed a low linguistic enlightenment level in the aforementioned linguistic systems. That was concluded through having an arithmetic mean of (27.52) and a relative weight of (55.04) %. The results also showed that there isn’t any statistically significant difference between students’ linguistic enlightenment levels – at the significance level of (a≥ 0.05) – which can be attributed to their academic stream (i.e. the scientific or literary stream). The results also showed that there are statistically significant differences between students’ linguistic enlightenment levels – at the significance level of (a≥ 0.05) – which can be attributed to their gender in syntax, and morphology. The latter differences were for the favor of female students. However, there isn’t any statistically significant difference between students’ linguistic enlightenment levels – at the significance level of (a≥ 0.05) – which can be attributed to their gender in semantics.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".