MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952420433 · doi:10.21083/ajote.v7i3.4325

FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT PRACTICES AMONG DISTANCE EDUCATION TUTORS IN GHANA

2018· article· en· W2952420433 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Isaac Oduro Amoako

Bibliographic record

VenueAfrican Journal of Teacher Education · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicStudent Assessment and Feedback
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFormative assessmentTUTORKnowledge surveyMedical educationData collectionTest (biology)PsychologyMathematics educationMedicineSummative assessmentStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines formative assessment procedures commonly used by Distance Education tutors’ during facilitation of the course model content. A descriptive survey research design was employed for the study. Census method was used in selecting the study respondents (tutors’) who were hundred and fifty (150) in number. Self-developed questionnaire was used for the data collection after it has been pilot tested for its refinement. The study revealed that ‘observation’, ‘oral questioning’, ‘peer-assessment’, ‘student self-assessment’ and ‘tutor made test’ are the current formative assessment practices of course tutors of on-site Distance Education in Ghana. It was recommended that tutors must use a wide range of formative assessment practices and not to cling on a single one. Unique student characteristics warrant the use of multiple formative assessment technique.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.389 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAfrican Journal of Teacher EducationSame topicStudent Assessment and FeedbackFrench-language works237,207