MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402140258 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v15n1p191

Improving English Teaching Skills: An Online Course for Non-English Major Teachers in Southern Thailand’s Rural Primary Schools

2024· article· en· W4402140258 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ratima Tianchai, Songsri Soranastaporn, Aphiwit Liang-Itsara

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCourse (navigation)Mathematics educationPrimary (astronomy)Medical educationComputer sciencePsychologyMedicinePhysicsAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mixed-methods study addressed the needs and challenges faced by first-grade English teachers in rural primary schools in Southern Thailand (for example, lack of pedagogical training). The study’s primary objectives were to investigate these teachers’ needs and difficulties, develop a 15-hour online pedadgocial training course, and evaluate its effectiveness after the training was completed. The research involved 33 teachers and 153 students and employed various tools, including questionnaires, an online pedagogical training and language course, pre-and post-tests, and semi-structured interviews about the experience. The findings highlighted the importance of training in speaking, vocabulary, materials, games, and communicative language teaching (CLT) for these teachers. Statistically significant improvements (p < 0.001) were observed in post-test scores for both teachers and students, indicating the positive impact of the customized online training course on teachers’ English skills and teaching performance and improvement in student learning outcomes.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designNot applicable
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 venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicSecond Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207