MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044679867 · doi:10.5539/elt.v13n8p160

Integration of Technology among Saudi EFL Teachers

2020· article· en· W3044679867 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amal Almalki

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language Teaching · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Technology Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTechnology integrationPsychologyEducational technologyPerceptionAffect (linguistics)Mathematics educationMedical educationPedagogyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the field of education, technology is currently considered a new trend. This study aims to examine the factors that affect the integration of new technologies in EFL classrooms. Factors considered include teacher’s age, teacher’s level of technological proficiency, and teacher’s perception of technology. To achieve this, the study involved a questionnaire consisting of 21 items and a total of 38 Saudi EFL teachers participated in it. The results indicate that there is no significant relationship between teacher age and technology integration. However, both teachers’ level of proficiency in technology and teacher’s perception of technology were significantly related to technology integration in Saudi EFL classrooms. It is recommended to provide teachers with professional development and support in technology integration and to supply classrooms with resources such as computers and smart boards. 

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Language TeachingSame topicEducation and Technology IntegrationFrench-language works237,207