Faculty members’ perceptions towards utilizing blackboard in teaching system at Hafr Al-Batin University, Saudi Arabia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and objective: The faculty members’ perceptions regarding Blackboard as the pedagogical management tool plays a vital role in learning and teaching process. Aim: To survey the perceptions of faculty members towards utilizing Blackboard in the teaching system at Hafr Al-Batin University.Methods: Design: Quantitative descriptive design was utilized depending on online surveys. Setting: The study was conducted in all Colleges of Hafr Al-Batin University. Participants: 174 faculty members from different colleges at the University of Hafr Al-Batin. Tools: Questionnaire consisted of two parts; the first includes the faculty demographic information and the second describes faculty perception in four sections; usefulness, enjoyment, satisfaction, and challenges.Results: The study demonstrated that perceived “usefulness” and “enjoyment” were the most highly mean scores.Conclusions: The faculty members have a positive attitude towards the implementation of the Blackboard system. Recommendations: A great need for training of both faculty members and students in the Blackboard system regularly.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".