MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3161120685 · doi:10.21083/ajote.v10i1.6521

The Paradox of Ghanaian High School Mathematics Teachers’ Perspectives on ICT Use

2021· article· en· W3161120685 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Farouq Sessah Mensah, Douglas Darko Agyei

Bibliographic record

VenueAfrican Journal of Teacher Education · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation and Communications TechnologyCurriculumContext (archaeology)Mathematics educationProfessional developmentRelevance (law)PedagogyPsychologyPolitical scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper sought to investigate the perceived use of Information Communication Technology (ICT) of high school mathematics teachers in Ghana. A hundred high school mathematics teachers from 20 public schools,10 each located in the rural and urban areas respectively in the Central region of Ghana, were stratified and used in the study. A questionnaire and semi-structured interviews were used to collect data. The result of the study indicated low levels of perceived knowledge/skills of ICT use by high school mathematics teachers, contrary to their reported high usage levels of ICTs. The findings of the study also indicated that the high school mathematics teachers’ ICT use in a professional related context (instructional delivery, assessment, and professional learning network) was minimal compared to use for social networking, although they seemed to be fully aware of the relevance of using ICT in a professional related manner. Similarly, their reported technical knowledge/skills of ICT were low. Thus, the results of the study suggest that, though the teachers reported high ICT usage, actual usage seems to be at the peripheries. Among other things, this study has implications for curriculum development and training in Ghana and countries of similar context. It may be necessary for the Curriculum Research Development Division (CRDD) of the Ghana Education Service in collaboration with the related agencies to explicitly define parameters such as what ICT tools must be used, when they must be used, and how they should be used when reviewing and revising their mathematics teaching curriculum.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.321
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAfrican Journal of Teacher EducationSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207