Strategy for Inserting Thai Culture into Teaching and Learning Management of Teachers and the Perception on Thai Culture among Korean Students Studying Thai as a Foreign Language in Universities in Republic of Korea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research utilized the combination between quantitative and qualitative researches. The research sample included Thai language course lecturers both Thai and South Korean persons, including 1st-4th year South Korean undergraduate students. The instruments used included the questionnaire on teaching strategy which also included Thai culture to be used in providing instruction on Thai language for South Korean students. The forms of tests assessing the perception on Thai culture of South Korean students. Two interview forms to interview the teachers and South Korean students on their perception and acquisition of Thai culture. The findings reveal the teacher’s opinion on strategy to integrate Thai culture with the instruction on teaching Thai language to South Korean students studying Thai as a foreign language in aspects of integrating Thai language along Thai culture and instructional strategy integrated with Thai culture. The overall outcome reveals that the sample subjects agree mostly with such statement. Concerning the result of the perception on Thai culture of South Korean students, it was found that 14.29% of students had obtained the score at very good level, 70% at good level, 14.29% at moderate level, and 1.43% at minimal level. The average level was of 73.5 scores.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".