Responding to English Grammatical Challenges: The Design and Development of Exemplary Material for Form One Learners in Tanzania
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article proposes strategies for designing and evaluating curriculum materials for enhancing English language grammatical competence among Form One learners in Tanzanian secondary schools. Using quasi-experimental and phenomenological designs, the authors developed an exemplary Learner Centered Instructional Grammar Material (LCIGM) focusing on Form One learners. Materials design approach and Constructivism Theory of learning guided the exercise. The data for the study were collected through documentary review, interviews, questionnaires and teaching and learning observations of 40 Form One learners chosen from three randomly selected secondary schools in the Dodoma Region of Tanzania. Both pre-test and post-tests were done to understand the suitability of the newly developed material to meet the purpose of enhancing grammatical competence among Form One learners. The findings and observations revealed that both teachers and learners benefited from the designed activity-based material which, in turn, enhanced learners’ grammatical performance, both in spoken and written form. The authors concluded by urging the stakeholders to design the material that are activity based to improve the learners’ grammatical competence.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 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".