MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3114105378 · doi:10.5539/hes.v11n1p65

Obstacles of Teaching Science in Saudi Universities and the Proposed Solutions during the COVID-19

2020· article· en· W3114105378 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eiad Abdulhalim Mohammad Alnajjar

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Technology Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRanking (information retrieval)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Relation (database)Rank (graph theory)Sample (material)CurriculumObstacleHomogeneousMathematics educationPsychologyHigher educationMedical educationPedagogyPolitical scienceMathematicsComputer scienceChemistryMedicineArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to investigate the main obstacles and barriers that affect Teaching Science in Saudi Universities and the Proposed Solutions during the COVID-19. The sample consists of 94 male and female students chosen randomly from different year groups in the department of science at Al-Qunfudah College at Umm Al-Qura University in Saudi Arabia. Data was collected through a questionnaire developed by the researcher. The results showed that the ranking of the Obstacles, respectively, were: obstacles to the university, obstacles for students, obstacles in the curriculum, and at the last rank it was the obstacles of faculty members. We can say that there is no relation between GPA and obstacles of E-learning, as well the both of males and female students were homogeneous and agreed about existing of obstacles nearly in the same degree. Also, there is a positive relation between the study levels and some obstacles of E-learning.

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)0.011
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher Education StudiesSame topicEducation and Technology IntegrationFrench-language works237,207