Influence of Meta-cognitive Training and Cognitive Styles on Numeracy Achievement of Nigerian Pupils’ in Computer-mediated Classrooms
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study examined the effect of meta-cognitive training on field-dependent and field-independent primary schoolpupils’ knowledge of numeracy concepts. It also investigated the moderating effects of sex on meta-cognitivetraining of the two categories of learners on performance in numeracy. In addition, it investigated the moderatingeffects of sex on the outcome of meta-cognitive training of the two categories of learners’ in a computer-mediatedclassroom on retention of learned numeracy concept. These were with a view to providing information on howmeta-cognitive training affected numeracy achievement of Nigerian pupils' in computer-mediated classrooms. Thestudy adopted the pretest, posttest, control group experimental design. The study population comprised primaryschool pupils and the sample comprised 39 primary three pupils from two schools in two educational zones. Theschools were purposely selected because of availability of computer facilities in their schools. Three researchinstruments were used for this study namely: Meta-cognitive Training Manual (MCTM), Pupils’ Achievement Teston Numeracy (PATON) (response instrument) and One treatment instrument which is Computer NumeracyInstructional Package for Primary School Children (CNIP2SC) (stimulus instrument). Data obtained were analyzedusing descriptive and inferential statistics of Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA). The results showed thatmeta-cognitive training had significant effect on performance of learned numeracy concepts of field-dependent andfield-independent learners’ (F = 11.16; p<0.05), sex had no significant effect on performance in numeracy betweenthe groups of learners (F = 0.14; p>0.05). It was also obtained that there was no moderating effect of sex on retentionof numeracy performance of the two categories of learners (F = 0.22; p >0.05).
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 it