The Effect of Interactive Drills Using Dry Lab on the Acquisition of Laboratory Skills in Learning Science Among the Ninth-Grade Female Students in Palestine in Light of Their Thinking Style
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 aimed to identify the effect of the interactive drills using the dry laboratory on the acquisition of scientific concepts and laboratory skills in science among the ninth-grade female students in Palestine in light of their thinking styles. The study used quizzes of experimental method. The sample consisted of 68 female students distributed on two groups: an experimental group (n = 34 students) and a control group (n = 34 students). In order to achieve the objectives of the study, test of laboratory skills and thinking styles tests were used. The results showed that there were statistically significant differences between the means of the experimental group that was studied using the interactive method of the dry laboratory and the control group that studied using the traditional method via laboratory skills tests in favor of the experimental group. The results also revealed that there was an interaction between the method of teaching (the interactive drills using dry laboratory and the traditional method) and thinking styles on the acquisition of laboratory skills. In light of these results, several recommendations were suggested.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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