MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112662811 · doi:10.5539/elt.v14n1p1

Competency-Based Curriculum (CBC) in Kuwait: from the Ideal to Real

2020· article· en· W3112662811 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Taiba Sadeq, Rahima S. Akbar, Fatma Al Wazzan

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language Teaching · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Learning Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPublic Authority for Applied Education and Training
KeywordsCurriculumCompetence (human resources)PsychologyMedical educationQualitative researchMathematics educationPedagogySociologyMedicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following the steps of countries known for their rigorous education systems, and under the supervision and recommendations of the World Bank in 2015/2016, Kuwait placed a considerable budget to instigate a curriculum reform, via the implementation of Competence-Based Curriculum (CBC), which was adapted three years ago. However, the relatively modest outcome was controversial and did not meet the expectations of both policymakers and teachers. This study investigated the factors that hindered progression of CBC in the English curriculum as expressed by ESL teachers in the field. The study utilized a mixed-method design whereby both quantitative and qualitative data were used to fulfill the research objectives. Findings indicate that ESL teachers generally held positive views on CBC, yet several obstacles hindered CBC efficacy in the schools of Kuwait. The study also listed a number of pros and cons of CBC practice in Kuwait. Interviews with stakeholders brought a number of issues of misconduct, if not contained, no curriculum reform would gain the anticipated positive outcomes. Research objectives were addressed as a recommendation for future planning of curriculum change, contributing to the field of study.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Language TeachingSame topicHigher Education Learning PracticesFrench-language works237,207