MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394999896 · doi:10.17576/jkukm-2024-36(2)-30

Model of Flipped Classroom Environment for Mastery Learning Approach Using the “ZOOMRBT App”

2024· article· en· W4394999896 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Noor Izwan Nasir, Marina Ibrahim Mukhtar

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Kejuruteraan · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducation and Learning Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKementerian Pendidikan MalaysiaUniversiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia
KeywordsFlipped learningComputer scienceMathematics educationPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the digital era that encourages innovation in educational technology, it is crucial to incorporate the use of technology into pedagogy. Since the inception of hybrid learning and other approaches that involve students and instructors in educational activities, the learning environment has undergone significant changes. By utilizing instructional resources such as textbooks and videos, it has become feasible to engage with students beyond the confines of the classroom and during evening hours. Research conducted on students in grades 8 and 9 in Ontario, Canada, revealed that due to their limited spare time, they opted to study and complete their homework after school. Moreover, they exhibited a clear prioritization of their depth of subject knowledge over other factors. The study aimed to adapt the existing learning environment to establish a new environment conducive to mastery learning. It involved fifteen student participants, including an expert teacher in the flipped classroom teaching method. The study employed qualitative techniques such as focus groups, document analysis, expert agreement percentages, and innovative flipping of the classroom. The study resulted in the identification of five thematic analyses: learning flexibility, application skills, usage of application skills, mastery assessment, and the human touch. Collectively, these qualitative findings provide compelling evidence that the research participants actively engage with various aspects of the flipped learning environment, as outlined by the aforementioned themes. The participants in the case study acted as both fresh and established elements within the flipped learning environment.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.005

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal KejuruteraanSame topicEducation and Learning InterventionsFrench-language works237,207