The Effect of a Computer Program Based on Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation and Evaluation (ADDIE) in Improving Ninth Graders’ Listening and Reading Comprehension Skills in English in Jordan
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
The study aimed to assess the effectiveness of a computer program based on Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation and Evaluation (ADDIE) Model on the achievement of Ninth Graders’ listening and Reading Comprehension Skills in English. The study sample comprised 70 ninth graders during the second semester of the academic year 2016/2017. The selected students were distributed into two groups: an experimental group and a control one. A computer program based on Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation and Evaluation (ADDIE) was prepared, and a 40-item listening test in addition to a 40-item reading comprehension test were designed according to modules outcomes which were presented in (Teachers’ Book Action Pack 9). Validity and reliability were ensured for both tests. The results showed a statistically significance difference at (α=0.05) between the mean scores of the control compared to the experimental group on both tests (listening achievement test and reading comprehension achievement test) due to the independent variable implementing a computerized program based on ADDIE Model in favor of the experimental group.
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 | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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