MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943931142 · doi:10.29173/iasl7140

The Effect of “The Book Characters Are Among Us” Activity on the Reading Culture of Students

2018· article· en· W2943931142 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rahime Ordu

Bibliographic record

VenueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCreative Drama in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)Order (exchange)DramaThe InternetMultimediaComputer scienceMedia studiesMathematics educationPsychologyWorld Wide WebSociologyVisual artsPolitical scienceArtLawBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We live in an era where knowledge becomes very diverse, expands and change quickly. Reading is the most effective way in order to follow the knowledge, which is accelerated by the democracy and developments of the communication technologies. Therefore, modern societies give special attention to the activities regard to the reading culture.
 Nowadays, we are facing a young generation which does not need and care about reading as well as does not know how/why to read a literature writing. This generation prefers a consumption based artificial game world which is served via computer technologies and this kind of artificial places that internet cafes and game centers serve rather than reading and going to libraries. 
 This study aims to present “Book Characters Are Among Us” activity which makes reading interesting for teenagers by connecting reading with drama and improves their reading, writing and speaking skills. In addition, it evaluates the results of the activity which was held with a group of students.
 It was observed that, students started being interested in reading books, doing critical reading to understand and know the characters in the books, obtaining the creative thinking and writing experience and improving their speaking abilities that’s to “Books Are Among Us” activity. The activities were intentionally organized in Z Library in order to make students be aware of the facilities and possibilities which were given to their usage. The factors such as comfortable sitting zones, easiness of reaching a book, computer technology, being wide and spacious, usage of the place for book interviews, presentations and drama activities other than book taking and returning are the reasons for students to come to Z Library.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score0.487

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.252 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIASL Annual Conference ProceedingsSame topicCreative Drama in EducationFrench-language works237,207