A Phenomenographic Study on Views About Entertaining and Boring Situations in Learning Process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the learning process, it is accepted that learning with entertainment is important in participation in the process and retention of learning. Thus, the aim of the present study was to investigate the views of students and teachers on entertaining and boring settings in the learning process. Phenomenography method was used in the study. The study group included fourth grade teachers and students in public and private schools in Adiyaman province central district in Turkey. In this context, seven schools, four private and three public schools, were selected among the schools, where students of the parents with different socio-economic background attended, with purposive sampling method. A total of 10 primary school 4th grade teachers employed these schools participated in the study on a voluntary basis. The study group included 80 students. Individual and focus group interview and photointerviewing techniques were used in data collection Data were analyzed with content analysis method. In the study, it was concluded that teachers and students liked similar class settings and both teachers and students liked classrooms that were furnished with sufficient number of tools and equipment, heating and lighting, where colorful and plenty of activities could be conducted and equipped with technological tools. Furthermore, it was determined that the teachers and students criticized the photographs they disliked due to the lack of facilities in the classroom to implement different methods, similarities with their own classrooms, or for being dark and old-looking, and the unhappy demeanor of the students and teachers on the photographs. The study findings were discussed and interpreted within the framework of the literature.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".