The Impact of Electronic Mind Maps on Students’ Reading Comprehension
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
This study aimed to investigate the impact of the electronic mind map (IMindMap) on the development of reading comprehension among the ninth grade students in Jordan. The sample of the study consisted of two ninth grade sections from two public schools in Irbid First Directorate during the academic 2016-2017. Each section consisted of (30) students and the two sections were assigned randomly to an experimental group and a control group. The experimental group was taught the chosen texts using the Electronic Mind Mapping strategy while the control group was taught the same texts using the traditional method. The study data were collected using a reading comprehension test that was administered for both groups as a pre and a posttest. The statistical analysis showed a significant difference at the level of (α=0.05) between the mean scores of both groups in favor of the experimental group. Besides, the findings showed that the effect of applying the electronic mind maps in teaching reading texts was medium. Based on the findings of the study, a number of recommendations were made for both teachers and the Ministry of Education. The most notable recommendation was to train teachers in general and English teachers in particular on how to design electronic mind maps and apply them in their teaching practices.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it