Teachers with Participatory Action to Enhance 21st Century Learner Skills
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research aimed to enhance the 21st-century skills of students at Sarakulnawitaya School by focusing on communication skills, creativity, critical thinking, and collaboration. The research methodology was Participatory Action Research. The objectives of the research were threefold: 1) change occurred, 2) learning developed, and 3) knowledge gained from practical experience. The research involved 20 teachers as co-researchers and 50 students. The results of this study compared the average performance across three phases: before and after the implementation of Cycle 1, and after the implementation of Cycle 2. The findings indicated that: 1) The implementation of 55 predetermined strategies for enhancing learners' skills in the 21st century resulted in the increase of the average scores from 2.42 to 2.74 and 3.02, respectively, while students' communication, creativity, and analytical thinking, and teamwork skills improved as reflected in their average scores of 2.46, 2.77, and 3.06. 2) The research team, participants, and educational institution gained knowledge and learning from the various implementation phases, particularly in terms of team awareness, mutual assistance, systematic problem-solving, and collaboration. 3) The research yielded valuable insights into the relationship between driving forces that hinder change, methods for overcoming resistance, and the resulting changes. This knowledge is referred to as the "Teacher-Involved Model for Enhancing 21st-Century Learner Skills in Sarakulnawitaya School."
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".