Teachers and Participatory Action Research for Developing Learning Environments
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
This research aims to develop learning environments through Participatory Action Research (PAR) methodology in a specific context of the Department of Electronics, Nong Han Industrial and Community Education College. Three development outcomes are expected: (1) changes in expected and non-expected outcomes of action; (2) action-based learning in the researchers, research participants and the institute and (3) knowledge from the grounded theory. The results are as the followings: 1) there are positive changes in both expected and unanticipated outcomes consisting of the implementation of the co-designated development approaches and the nature of the expected learning environments, 2) the researchers, research participants, and the institute learn about the efficiency of working together, which makes everyone realize how inefficient working alone was in the past, and 3) a body of knowledge gained from practice describes the relationship between the expected changes, and the driving force and resistances to change as well as ways to overcome the resistances.
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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it