MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389953671 · doi:10.5539/jel.v13n1p101

Developing a Model to Enhance Junior High School Teacher 21st Century Learning Management Competencies

2023· article· en· W4389953671 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Uckarajade Sihawong, Songsak Phusee-orn

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology-Enhanced Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMahasarakham UniversityNational Research Council of Thailand
KeywordsCurriculumExcellenceCoachingBlended learningEducational technologyPsychologyPedagogyKnowledge managementComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study pursues a comprehensive tripartite agenda: firstly, to investigate the essential requisites for formulating a model geared towards augmenting teachers’ 21st century learning management competencies; secondly, to design a tailored model aligned with these competencies; and thirdly, to scrutinize the tangible impact of model implementation. Employing a multi-phased approach involving meticulous need analysis, model development, and real-world implementation, this study navigated a dynamic educational landscape. Phase 1 involved 353 participants, collectively shaping the foundation for subsequent phases. Phase 2 harnessed the expertise of five seasoned educators and scholars to collaboratively refine and assess the model. Phase 3 expanded the scope to encompass 24 junior high school teachers and 36 educational stakeholders, further validating the model’s utility. The outcomes highlight a model encompassing curriculum development, learner-centered active learning strategies, media and technology integration, authentic learning assessment, and conducting research for learner development. This comprehensive model was fashioned as a dynamic workshop, integrating face-to-face training, coaching training, and online modules, thereby catering to diverse learning preferences. Remarkably, the model’s implementation elicited substantial benefits: significant enhancements were observed in teachers’ 21st century learning management skills, while students’ 21st century skills also experienced discernible progress. Notably, the model’s overall quality, rigorously evaluated through the CIPPIEST model, reaffirms its excellence and potential for sustainable educational advancement.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.734
Threshold uncertainty score0.728

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 designOther design
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 Education and LearningSame topicTechnology-Enhanced Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207