MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377043533 · doi:10.47119/ijrp1001251520234907

Utilization of Self-Learning Modules and Pupils’ Academic Performance during the Transition Period

2023· article· en· W4377043533 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Leah Loraine O. Cobanban, Nick C. Pañares

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Research Publications · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology-Enhanced Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Competence (human resources)Mathematics educationCommitPsychologyDescriptive statisticsComputer scienceMathematicsStatisticsGeographySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The utilization of self-learning modules is a great help for pupils due to their enhanced quality as a learning material that will support teachers in the classes. This research study investigated the extent of the utilization of SLMs in the transition period from MDL to face-to-face and the pupils academic performance in the First Quarter of S.Y.2022-2023. It was conducted among twelve (12) Public Elementary Schools of West II District in the DepEd Division of Cagayan de Oro City with a total of one hundred (100) respondents. The study used a descriptive correlational method, and the survey data is analyzed through mean, standard deviation and Pearson r correlation. The study showed that the SLMs in the transition period in terms of activating previously learned material were highly utilized. The pupils have Very Satisfactory academic performance for the First Quarter. In the utilization of SLMs, the variables engaging with new material, proving ones competence and application in the real world, have a significant relationship to the pupils academic performance. It is recommended that teachers need to consider the use of new material or the SLMs to improve the delivery of lessons and instruction, assessment of learning, support mechanism, and development of learning resources in creating a productive learning environment in the classroom. Also, pupils should always be encouraged to completely commit to learning, answering, and doing different tasks when using the SLMs to further improve their academic performance.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.607
Threshold uncertainty score0.600

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.350 · 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 teacher head, 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 venueInternational Journal of Research PublicationsSame topicTechnology-Enhanced Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207