MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379184241 · doi:10.5430/jct.v12n3p216

Development and Effect of a SnowBall Teaching-Learning Model based on Flipped Learning

2023· article· en· W4379184241 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Soon Hee Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Teaching · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducation and Learning Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowball samplingFlipped learningPersonalityPsychologyAdaptabilityTeaching methodSignificant differenceMathematics educationComputer scienceMedicineSocial psychologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to nurture nursing talents with good interest in learning as well as adaptability to the field, it is necessary to have conditions for self-directed learning, this study aimed to the creation of an educational environment and teaching-learning methods; thus, developing a model suitable for nursing students is essential. A snowball teaching-learning model based on flipped learning was developed and applied to nursing students' basic nursing practice classes in order to understand the effect on self-directed learning ability, interpersonal ability, and personality. For the study period, from September 1, 2015 to July 31, 2016, 21 second-year students in the Department of Nursing at University D, located in B city, Busan were recruited through convenience sampling. The collected data were analyzed using SPSS WIN (Ver. 21.0). The results of the study indicated there was a significant difference in the self-directed learning ability score from 3.16±0.28 points before the teaching-learning model application to 3.99±0.49 points after the application of the teaching-learning model. There was a significant difference in from 3.67±0.49 points before application to 3.90±0.43 points after application. There was also a significant difference in the personality score, from 3.69±0.49 points before application of the teaching-learning model to 4.06±0.46 points after application. Therefore, since the flipped learning-based snowball teaching-learning model is helpful in improving job competency, repeated experimental studies are suggested to verify the effectiveness.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Curriculum and TeachingSame topicEducation and Learning InterventionsFrench-language works237,207