MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321790170 · doi:10.5430/jct.v12n1p301

The Impact of An Instructional Program Based on Multiple Intelligences Theory on Ninth Grade EFL Students’ motivation towards Learning English in Jordan

2023· article· en· W4321790170 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zeina Mohammad Al-Abdallat, Hamzah Ali Al-Omari, Alaa Mohammed Saleh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Teaching · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotional Intelligence and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Jordan
KeywordsTheory of multiple intelligencesNinthMathematics educationCurriculumPsychologyData collectionSample (material)Academic yearPedagogyMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to investigate the impact of an instructional program based on Multiple Intelligences Theory on motivation among ninth grade students in Amman during the academic year 2021-2022. The sample of the study consisted of 40 students in two sections who were randomly assigned to a control group (20 students) and to an experimental group (20 students). To achieve the purpose of the study, the researchers developed a questionnaire for data collection. Data were analyzed by using SPSS (i.e. means and standard deviations, and ANCOVA). The results of the study showed that the instructional program based on multiple intelligences theory was significantly more effective than the ordinary method in developing students’ motivation to learn English. Based on the results of this study, the researchers recommended that the principles of Multiple Intelligences Theory should be incorporated in EFL curriculum in Jordan to consolidate students’ motivation to learn English.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.359 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Curriculum and TeachingSame topicEmotional Intelligence and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207