MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952590426 · doi:10.29173/iasl7139

An Effective Method of Acquiring Efficient-Critical Reading Skills For Students: Reading Group Activity

2018· article· en· W2952590426 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Meltem Koçak

Bibliographic record

VenueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Practices and Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)PleasureCreativityReading comprehensionComprehensionPsychologyMathematics educationComputer scienceCognitive psychologyLinguisticsSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Today, one of the most important indicators of a country's development level is the reading rate of that country. Studies show that the reading rate is quite low in our country. This situation has many reasons such as social, psychological and traditional ones. One of the most important reasons is the lack of reading education. 
 Reading is a rich activity combining vision, recognition, comprehension, inquiry, comprehension, speaking, writing and production. Completing the process with all these actions makes the reader active reader. The effective reading of individuals who have acquired basic reading skills depends on the enrichment of activities with comprehension, speaking, writing and production activities during reading process. Effective one is a reader who likes reading, spends time with reading, questions what he reads, makes written and oral text, and can use his readings for himself and his community and makes inferences from the readings. Effective reading makes the reading activity of the person pleasant. The individual discovers something new like an exploration at every stage after basic reading through seeing, recognizing and understanding. These discoveries trigger creativity that includes imagination as well as past experiences. The easiest and shortest way of reaching the pleasure of producing something is experienced with effective reading.
 Giving importance to reading education in schools, teaching effective reading methods to students and providing them with feasible and sustainable reading projects will make a significant contribution to educating a generation who read, write, speak and produce in our country.
 In this study, the reading group activity, which is applied with a group of secondary school (high school) students, was introduced and the practicing results of the activity were evaluated.The target group of the students is 9th, 10th and 11th grade students. The target audience was firstly informed about effective-critical reading and reading group activity was introduced. The application based on voluntary participation was started with a reading group consisting of six people. In the following times, participation increased and fifteen reading groups, each consisting of six and seven individuals, were formed in the three months. During the reading process, groups were guided and process evaluations were made. In order for the groups participating in the event to share their reading experiences with other students, it was provided to make presentations in the Z-library and arrange a book interview. Moreover, the reading activities of the groups within the scope of the Libraries Week were presented to the visitors through posters and presentations. Presentations were recorded with photographs and videos. It has been observed that reading group activity, which became widespread in school in a short time, increased the interest of students in reading and library. Students have learned the effective-critical reading of the role-tasks offered by the group readings, and have gained other skills such as orienting their readings, making reading preferences, and distinguishing qualified works. Reading group activity is an effective reading method which can be applied in all schools under the guidance of Turkish and literature teachers and supports active-critical reading, reading habits and culture.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.006

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.425 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIASL Annual Conference ProceedingsSame topicEducational Practices and ChallengesFrench-language works237,207