MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402752989 · doi:10.5539/jel.v14n1p257

Development of an Instructional Model to Enhance Mathematical Literacy for Secondary Students

2024· article· en· W4402752989 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Pannapawadee Boonsot, Chowwalit Chookhampaeng

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematics Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationLiteracyPsychologyTeaching methodPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims (1) to develop an instructional model to enhance mathematical literacy for secondary students and (2) to examine the effects of using this instructional model. The sample group consisted of students from Lampabpla Wittayakarn School, under the jurisdiction of the Surin Secondary Educational Service Area Office in Thailand by using cluster random sampling, during the second semester of the 2021 academic year. Fifteen students from Grade 9/2 were selected as the experimental group, and 15 students from Grade 9/1 were selected as the control group. The data collection tools: 1) interviews; 2) focus group discussion; 3) mathematical literacy tests; and 4) student satisfaction questionnaires. The statistics used for data analysis include percentage, arithmetic mean, standard deviation, dependent and independent t-test. The research findings revealed that (1) the instructional model to enhance mathematical literacy for secondary students comprises six components: 1) principles and basic theoretical concepts, 2) objectives of the model, 3) instructional management procedures, 4) social system, 5) principles of response, and 6) support system. (2) results of using the instructional model showed that: 1) the experimental group of students had markedly higher mathematical literacy after the intervention compared to before, at the .05 significance level; 2) the experimental group had significantly higher mathematical literacy than the control group, at the .05 significance level; and 3) the experimental group reported the highest level of satisfaction with the instructional model to enhance mathematical literacy for secondary students, with an average score of 4.50 and a standard deviation of 0.17.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.607
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.418 · 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 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 venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicMathematics Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207