Pre-Service Teachers’ Perceptions of the Effectiveness of Microsoft Teams for Remote Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper draws on social constructivism and the domestication model and investigates pre-service teachers’ perceptions of the usefulness of Microsoft Teams for remote learning. This research is part of a descriptive cross-sectional study. It is neither causal nor relational. The participants comprised of 215 undergraduate pre-service teachers from an all-female teacher training college in Kuwait and were surveyed during year 1 of their three-year academic programme. Descriptive statistical analysis and One-way ANOVA were used to analyse the data. Results indicated an overall positive perception of Microsoft Teams by all participants. The findings suggest that Microsoft Teams is an effective virtual leaning platform because of its quality, user friendliness and functionalities. The respondents perceived that the tool played a significant role in fostering interactive learning and for receiving and providing feedback. However, the pre-service teachers perceived that the platform was not suitable for independent learning and collaborative learning compared to other online collaborative tools. The empirical contribution of this study is founded on the fact that it is conducted in the context of virtual remote learning at an undergraduate teacher education level where there is limited empirical evidence. This study adds to and extends existing literature by contributing to an understanding of the domestication of virtual learning platforms when making the shift from purely traditional classrooms to remote 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".