MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2884745155 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v8n6p12

Enhancing L2 Learners’ Critical Thinking Skills Through a Connectivism-Based Intelligent Learning System

2018· article· en· W2884745155 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jiangping Chen, Jie Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Critical Thinking Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersZhejiang UniversityMcKnight Foundation
KeywordsCritical thinkingMathematics educationPsychologyConnectivismClass (philosophy)Asynchronous communicationComputer scienceLearning theoryArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Rain Classroom, grounded in the theory of connectivism in the digital era, is a mobile-supported tool for blended learning. This tool renders synchronous and asynchronous teacher-student interactions through dual-channel teaching in and out of class. In the study, the Critical Thinking Skills Survey (CTSS) was adopted to measure the critical thinking skills (CTS) of 112 first-year undergraduates majoring in English in mainland China. A pretest-posttest non-equivalent two-group quasi-experimental design was applied to compare the CTS of those learners of English as a second language (L2) instructed under the Rain-Classroom-based intelligent learning system with those taught by the traditional lecture approach. The mixed results indicated that the intelligent learning system had a positive effect on students’ overall CTS development with significant improvement in the interpretation subscale but had almost no influence on the evaluation and self-regulation subscales. The intelligent learning approach in this study is empirically meaningful in students’ CTS enhancement, but further research is warranted to make this system more efficacious in facilitating L2 learners’ CTS.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.261
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.746

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.261
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.336 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of English LinguisticsSame topicEducation and Critical Thinking DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207