MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288438072 · doi:10.5539/jel.v11n5p142

Thai Language Curriculum to Enhance Creativity Thinking Skills for Primary School Students

2022· article· en· W4288438072 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Curriculum and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumCreativityPsychologyMathematics educationCritical thinkingFeelingCreative thinkingPedagogyConvergent thinkingSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Creativity in the present society is essential for growth and reform. It is also beneficial for having creative students organize thought, imagine and discover new ideas from an early age. This study aimed to 1) investigate primary information related to learning management results, current situations, and school curriculum development needs, 2) design a Thai language curriculum to enhance creative thinking for primary school students, and 3) study the effects of the curriculum. The study was divided into three phases: primary information research, curriculum design, and implementation. The participants consisted of 30 students in grade 5 during the 2019 academic year. Phase 1 revealed that the majority of schools still had fair fourth-standard results, which related to the ability of analysis, synthesis, critical, creative, and considered thinking. There were approaches to solving the problem that involved analyzing the policy and the practice outcomes. The results of phase 2 revealed that the curriculum’s principles and goals were to assist students in improving their creative thinking in two dimensions: 1) knowledge and intelligence and 2) feeling, mind, and attitude. The results of phase 3 yielded that 1) primary school students had higher scores after learning to enhance creative thinking significantly at .05, 2) creative thinking of students who learned by using the curriculum was higher than creative thinking of students who learned through traditional curriculum significantly at .05. It can be stated that promoting creative thinking should be encouraged in many subject areas as early as possible.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.426
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.416 · 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