THE EFFECTIVENESS OF INTERACTIVE E-BOOKS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENTIFIC CONCEPTS DURING "SCIENCE COURSE" AND ITS RELATION TO THE DIFFERENCE OF COGNITIVE STYLE (VERBAL/VISUAL) IN STUDENTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study aims at measuring the effect of the interactive book design on the development of scientific concepts and its relation to the difference of the cognitive (verbal/ conceptual) method of science students in the ninth grade. This study is to determine the relationship between the growth of scientific concepts among students with the cognitive and verbal approach. There are differences in this growth according to the cognitive method. This study's significance is the importance of considering students' characteristics in their cognitive approaches in applying and integrating technology in education. The study results indicate that there are statistically significant differences in the development of scientific concepts among students. The differences in their cognitive methods were verbal or conceptual. The conceptual students were more developed than the verbal students. The results also indicate that the e-book has a significant impact on developing these concepts among students with a cognitive approach compared to their cognitive peers. This is because the interactive e-book did not consider the verbal students' characteristics as much as they perceived the design's visual students' characteristics. It is recommended to research the need to pay attention to the variable method of knowledge when designing interactive e-books to be more valuable to cover a larger segment of students with different cognitive methods. It is necessary to identify the cognitive techniques of students to take care of educational applications. That will help them according to their strategies to expand the recruitment of interactive electronic books in science and conduct More rigorous studies in cognitive methods and link them to modern technological innovations. Article visualizations:
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 | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".