MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793665011 · doi:10.5539/ies.v11n3p92

The Effectiveness of Using Brainstorming Strategy in the Development of Academic Achievement of Sixth Grade Students in English Grammar at Public Schools in Jordan

2018· article· en· W2793665011 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Acquisition and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrainstormingGrammarMathematics educationEnglish grammarTest (biology)PsychologyPopulationGrammar schoolTeaching methodAchievement testAcademic achievementPedagogyComputer scienceSociologyStandardized testLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study aims to identify the effect of using brainstorming method in the teaching of English grammar; to improve the level of sixth grade students in English grammar at public schools in Jordan. The study population consisted of all sixth grade students of both sexes. The sample of the study was chosen in the random stratified manner, represented in four schools: two for males and two for females, which were divided into two groups (experimental and control). The results showed that there were significant differences at the level of (α = 0.05) in the achievement test in the English grammar, in favor of the experimental group. The results also showed significant differences between males and females in the achievement test in favor of the females. One of the most prominent recommendations was to refer to those concerned with educational guidance, and school administrations to give priority to the issue of the weakness of students in English grammar by focusing on the use of modern methods of teaching, including the method of brainstorming.This study deals with a vital subject concerns those interested in the educational process, especially in the field of teaching English, where the study sheds light on the method of brainstorming and how to benefit from it to narrow the gap resulting from traditional practices in the teaching of English grammar, in order to reach objective results that reflect the pedagogical and educational reality regarding the level of students' achievement in the English grammar.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.369 · 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