MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402752994 · doi:10.5539/jel.v14n1p177

Self-Perception About Digital Skills of Pre-Service Teachers in a Thailand University Context

2024· article· en· W4402752994 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chaiyos Paiwithayasiritham, Kemmanat Mingsiritham, Gan Chanyawudhiwan, Seksan Amatmontree, Areewan Iamsa-ard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital literacy in education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)PsychologyPerceptionMathematics educationPedagogyMedical educationApplied psychologyGeographyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The digital revolution has significantly impacted education, with digital technology becoming an integral part of teaching and learning, resulting in the emergence of a digital society. Educational institutions at all levels currently demand new qualifications and knowledge from modern-day teachers, including digital skills for effectively transmitting knowledge to learners to ensure that learning outcomes align with societal needs. Developing pre-service teachers poses a challenge in being educators who effectively transfer knowledge to learners. This study examined the digital skills competence required for future teachers, linking these skills with Thailand’s National Qualifications Framework for Higher Education, Professional Teacher Standards, and National Educational Standards. A total of 36 competencies across six areas have been identified. This paper analyzed 360 responses from a convenience sample of undergraduate education students in Thailand based on this validated instrument. The research findings indicated that users prioritize information technology and communication skills, necessitating a diverse range of skills, including search, tool usage, communication, and collaboration through technology. This data can be used to design learning management systems to develop digital skills aligned with the evolving needs and essential skills of future teachers.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.751
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.246 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicDigital literacy in educationFrench-language works237,207