MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401436885 · doi:10.5539/hes.v14n3p147

Development of An Instructional Model Based on the Professional Learning Community Process and Work-Based Learning to Enhance Classroom Research Competency

2024· article· en· W4401436885 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chompunoot Putinatr Ekkuaboon

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Research and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Council of Thailand
KeywordsProcess (computing)Professional developmentInstructional developmentMathematics educationProfessional learning communityPsychologyFaculty developmentWork (physics)Instructional designMedical educationComputer sciencePedagogyMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objectives of this research are to develop and study the effectiveness of the developed instructional model based on the professional learning community process and work-based learning in enhancing classroom research competencies. The sample groups used in the research were 32 third-year students of the Bachelor of Education Program in Teaching Chinese Language and English Language Teaching, selected by purposive sampling, from students who were preparing for teaching in educational schools. The data collection tools used in the research include; 1) a pre-test and a post-test, which are the same test with 25 multiple-choice questions (4 choices each) and complete worksheets 1-9. Statistics used in data analysis included mean, standard deviation, and t-test for dependent., the results indicate that the instructional model based on the professional learning community process and work-based learning to enhance classroom research competency called the PCW Model, consists of 4 important elements: 1) principles of the model, 2) objectives of the model, 3) steps of the model, and 4) measurement and evaluation of the model. Regarding the study on the effectiveness of the model; this indicates that after using the instructional model based on the professional learning community process and work-based learning to enhance classroom research competency, the students’ classroom research competency was significantly higher than before at the 0.01 level.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.371
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.319 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueHigher Education StudiesSame topicEducational Research and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207