Environmental Education Learning for Enhancing Wetlands Management in the Northeast of Thailand Using Cooperative-Based Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purposes of this research were to develop environmental education learning plans to enhance wetland management in the Northeast of Thailand by using cooperative-based learning for being efficient and effective, to study and compare knowledge about wetland management in the Northeast of Thailand, attitudes and environmental ethics before and after learning of undergraduate students and to compare knowledge, attitudes and environmental ethics of undergraduate students with a different gender. The sample used in the research was 107 undergraduate students selected by purposive sampling in the 1st semester of the academic year 2020. The research tools were learning plans on wetland management in the Northeast of Thailand using cooperative-based learning, a knowledge test on wetland management in the Northeast of Thailand, an attitude test, and an environmental ethics test. The statistics used in the research were frequency, percentage, mean, and standard deviation, including hypothesis testing using Paired t-test and F-test (One-Way ANOVA). The results showed that: the efficiency of the learning plans on wetland management in the Northeast of Thailand using cooperative-based learning was 97.78/92.36 and the effectiveness index (E.I.) was 0.9430, indicating that the student’s learning progress increased by 94.30%. The undergraduate students had an average score of knowledge about wetland management in the Northeast of Thailand, attitudes and environmental ethics in the post-test was higher than the pretest statistical significance (p < .05). There was no difference in the knowledge score of wetland management in the Northeast of Thailand and attitudes of undergraduate students of different gender (p > .05). And there was a statistically significant difference in environmental ethics of undergraduate students of different gender (p < .05). Male’ score of environmental ethics about wetland management in the Northeast of Thailand was higher than females.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".