Students’ Opinions about Their Ninth Grade Biology Textbook: From the Perspective of Constructivist Learning Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study aimed to determine students’ opinions about their ninth grade biology textbook that had been created in accordance with the constructivist learning approach. On the basis of a detailed literature review of studies on textbooks; questionnaires used for assessment of textbooks; and constructivist learning approach, a questionnaire was created and administered to 751 students from 9 schools located in the city of Trabzon. The questionnaire was classified into the following sections: contents, learning-teaching activities, assessment and evaluation activities, and physical design. The Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient was 0.94, and the data were analyzed using SPSS 15.0. Multiple findings pertaining to each section were obtained. Overall, it was found that the students were satisfied with their ninth grade biology textbook. While the existence of various visuals was being appreciated by most of the students, some aspects of the textbooks should be developed in order better to support constructivist learning in classrooms. The study also revealed that the questionnaire developed might be used to evaluate textbooks in terms of their appropriateness to constructivist learning theory. The findings of the study are expected to contribute to improving design for future textbooks.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".