MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307101894 · doi:10.5430/jct.v11n8p63

Impact of Teaching a Proposed Unit on Successful Intelligence and Augmented Reality in Biology on Lateral Thinking and Science Fiction among High School Students in Al-Saih City, Saudi Arabia

2022· article· en· W4307101894 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Norah Saleh Mohamed Al-Muqbil

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Teaching · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAugmented Reality Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlexibility (engineering)Mathematics educationTest (biology)Augmented realityCritical thinkingPsychologyScale (ratio)Computer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligenceBiologyGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study examined the impact of teaching a unit based on the Theory of Successful Intelligence and Augmented Reality in Biology on developing lateral thinking and science fiction among high school students in Al-Saih City, Saudi Arabia. To verify the research experience's effect, a quasi-experimental design, the "Lateral Thinking Test," and the "Science Fiction Scale" were used. The research sample included 34 experimental and 37 control students (all high school students). The research tool used to examine both groups' lateral thinking contains 24 questions on concepts, alternatives, linkages, and ideas. Science fiction skills include alertness, flexibility, imagery, daydreaming, retreating from reality, and sustaining direction. The results demonstrated a statistically significant difference (0.05) between the average scores of the experimental and control groups for each lateral thinking skill and the lateral thinking test as a whole, in favor of the experimental group. Also, teaching a unit based on the Theory of Successful Intelligence and Applications of Augmented Reality in biology helps develop lateral thinking and science fiction. The research advocated applying the notion of Successful Intelligence and Augmented reality in high school, based on the study's results, to improve educational outcomes such as "lateral thinking" and "science fiction".

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Curriculum and TeachingSame topicAugmented Reality ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207