Teaching & learning visual aids: power point and visibility / Chen Ai Hong, Saiful Azlan Rosli and Cosette Yoon Wey Hoe
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Visual aids play an imperative role in lecture delivery today. Visual aids enhance audience engagement and learning experience. The purpose of this study is to provide a better understanding of the illumination setting for Microsoft Office PowerPoint 2011 and its impact on learner's visibility at six-meter viewing distance during a lecture. Methods: The background illumination for Microsoft Office PowerPoint 2011 pre-set at one-quarter (25%), half (50%), three-quarters (75%), and full (100%) transparency levels in the visibility investigation. Visibility was inferred from the reading speed measurement to complete a text projected at six meters. Results: Visibility was affected significantly by different background illumination settings (p<0.05). The best visibility was found in a three-quarters transparency setting. Conclusions: Academicians should be more cautious about their PowerPoint text-background contrast in lecture preparation and delivery to enhance the learning environment.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it