Lesson Study Contributions: EFL Teachers' Competences Model in Teaching English at High School 21st-Century Learning Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The quality of learning relies on the teacher, serving as a critical factor in determining its effectiveness. This study aims to develop a teacher competency model through Lesson Study (LS) activities. Model competence refers to the regulation of Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture No 6565 in 2020. This study applied the qualitative descriptive research design. It utilized the lesson study approach in developing EFL teacher's professional knowledge competence, professional learning practice competence, and career professional development. The participants involved four EFL Teachers at Senior High School 10 Ternate City Indonesia. They consisted of one male and three females. Four EFL teachers were selected through purposive sampling with four criteria: (a) sex, (b) age, (c) teaching experience (d) educational background, and, (e) job status. Furthermore, the study data were obtained through three LS phases (plan, teach/do, and reflect/see) for four cycles. A 4-point Likert scale ((1=Thriving; 2= Capable; 3 = Worth; and 4 = advanced) was utilized to measure lesson study profile aspects on the development of EFL Teachers' Model competencies and it is an effect on students’ communication and critical thinking skills. Data was gained by a 4-point Likert scale calculated with frequency and presentation formula through Microsoft Excel Windows 10. The result showed that LS activities impacted the development of knowledge competencies, professional learning practices, and professional development of EFL teachers in learning English. It also improves communication, critical thinking, and student enthusiasm for English learning in class. This study provides opportunities for teachers to share knowledge, good learning practices, and experience, as well as reflect and learn to collaborate professionally. This study represents a unique contribution by integrating three models of teacher competence as an effort to adjust the Independent Curriculum.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".