MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309585142 · doi:10.5430/jct.v11n8p387

The Reality of Professional Development Programs for Middle School Science Teachers in Saudi Arabia in light of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS)

2022· article· en· W4309585142 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Naglaa Ali Moustaffa, Samaah Hasan Akkash Al-Enazi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Teaching · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicDiverse Educational Innovations Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNext Generation Science StandardsMathematics educationProfessional developmentScience educationCausationAcademic standardsPedagogyPsychologyEngineering ethicsEngineeringPolitical scienceHigher education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to the Next Generation Science Standards, the study sought to determine the reality of professional development programs for middle school science instructors in Al-Kharj Governorate, Saudi Arabia (NGSS). One of the study's most significant findings is that professional development programs for science teachers in the intermediate stage include central ideas according to the next-generation standards NGSS to a high degree, and teachers gain common and interrelated concepts. There are (135) science teachers in middle school schools in Al-Kharj Governorate. One of the most significant recommendations of the study was that professional development programs should be based on teachers' understanding of the foundations and principles of the central ideas. The need to enable the analysis of the critical concepts of geometry and technology is a must and must include activities to implement the principle of causation. Science teachers acquire scientific and geometric practices to a high degree under generation standards. Help them improve their abilities to choose contemporary models for science topics and teach them how to create geometric solutions to real-world science problems.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Curriculum and TeachingSame topicDiverse Educational Innovations StudiesFrench-language works237,207