MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4212911152 · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v11n7p71

The Effect of Digital Learning on the Academic Achievement and Motivation of Natural Sciences Learners: A Case Study of a South African Independent School

2022· article· en· W4212911152 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sam Ramaila, Nokubonga Peaceful Mpinga

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Higher Education · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationTest (biology)Academic achievementPsychologyIntervention (counseling)Digital learningQualitative propertyEmpirical researchPedagogyComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The South African basic education system is characterized by inadequate learner performance in science as a result of the provision of limited opportunities for learner-centred instruction. Digital resources can be used in science classrooms to enhance learner engagement and motivation. Digital resources include interactive game-based applications that can be used in online learning environments. This study examined the effect of digital learning on the academic achievement and motivation of grade 9 Natural Sciences learners in a South African independent school. The empirical investigation adopted a mixed method approach as part of a quasi-experimental design. Quantitative data was collected through the administration of questionnaires while qualitative data was collected through semi-structured interviews. A questionnaire based on the Skeletal System and a motivation questionnaire were administered as pre-tests and post-tests to establish the effectiveness of the use of digital resources as an instructional intervention on the academic achievement and motivation of grade 9 Natural Sciences learners. The empirical investigation is underpinned by the Cultural Historical Activity Theory as the underlying theoretical framework. Key findings revealed significant difference between the pre-test and post-test scores as a result of the use of digital resources as an instructional intervention. Theoretical implications for technology-enhanced teaching and learning are discussed.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.369 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Higher EducationSame topicInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207