MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121061878 · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v10n3p138

Doctoral Program Learning Module on Developing Leading Secondary School Teachers in Creative Thinking for Enhancement of Students’ Learning Activities in Thailand

2021· article· en· W3121061878 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chalard Chantarasombat, Ekanun Sombatsakulkit

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Higher Education · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Critical Thinking Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationCongruence (geometry)Index (typography)Test (biology)PsychologyMedical educationComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purposes of this study were to: 1) create and develop effective doctoral learning module on leading teachers development program to enhance critical thinking for students in secondary schools under the Office of Basic Education Commission, and 2) evaluate the developed module on its efficiency and effectiveness- its congruence of utility, possibility, and appropriateness, learning achievement of learners, learning retention, and the learners’ satisfaction. Samples were 20 Doctoral degree students in Educational Administration and Development and Leadership program, Northeastern University, Khon Kaen Province, Thailand. Statistics used were percentage, mean, standard deviation, effectiveness index, and t-test. The results were: 1) The developed module on learning activity management of leading teachers in simulation situation had 9 Modules: (1.1) Survey of former experience (1.2) Collaboration in planning (1.3) The development of creative teacher conception (1.4) The application of thinking approach (1.5) Practice in classroom (1.6) Supervision, follow up, and evaluation (1.7) Feedback and reinforcement (1.8) Seminar for enhancing strength, and (1.9) Reflection learning. 2) The efficiency and effectiveness of the developed module were: (2.1) The efficiency of 86.53 (E1) /83.29 (E2) which were higher than the committed 80/80 standard, (2.2) The congruence of utility, possibility, and appropriateness were in the highest level ( = 4.69, SD = 0.42), (2.3) The effectiveness index was 0.7397 which meant students gained more knowledge of 73.97%, (2.4) The students had significantly higher learning achievement after learning via the module at the level of 0.05, (2.5) There was no significant differences of learning achievement between after learning and after learning for two weeks which mean the students’ learning retention, and (2.6) The students had satisfaction on the developed module in the highest level ( = 4.52, SD = 0.41).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.381 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Higher EducationSame topicEducation and Critical Thinking DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207