Adaptive Micro-Learning Model Based on Dhamma Using Mixed Reality to Develop Students to Be Good Citizens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic forced school closures globally, leading to significant learning regression in academic performance, skills, and ethical development. This study aims to: 1) synthesize and develop an adaptive micro-learning model based on Dhamma principles using mixed reality (MR), 2) compare pre-and post-test results, and 3) assess the model’s impact on students’ good citizenship. Participants included 19 experts and 39 Grade 6 students. The methodology involved synthesizing and developing an adaptive micro-learning model, comparing pre- and post-study scores, and evaluating academic achievement and good citizenship development. The study identified seven key steps in the adaptive micro-learning model: 1) testing prior knowledge (Dhammannuta), 2) reporting prior knowledge results (Atthanyuta), 3) explaining learning objectives (Attanyuta), 4) outlining the learning path (Mattanyuta), 5) video-based learning (Kalanyuta), 6) collaborative learning via MR (Parisanyuta), and 7) peer knowledge exchange (Pukkalanyuta). The model’s effectiveness was rated highly (x̅ = 4.78, S.D. = 0.34). Students’ good citizenship scores significantly improved, increasing from a pre-test average of 15.87 points (52.90%) to a post-test average of 25.72 points (85.73%), with statistical significance 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".