Developing Chemistry Preservice Teachers' Learning Management Competency Using a Small-Scale Chemistry Laboratory Kit
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purposes of the study were to examine the effectiveness of small-scale chemistry laboratory kits on chemistry preservice teachers’ teaching competencies and to examine the effectiveness of small-scale chemistry laboratory kits on learners’ science competencies. The target group consisted of (1) 20 fourth-year preservice chemistry teachers who were undergoing teaching practicum in schools and (2) 300 Grade 11 students from 10 partner schools in the Professional Teacher Development Network of Mahasarakham Rajabhat University. The research instruments included: 1) a learning management plan with small-scale chemistry laboratory kits, (2) the teaching competency assessment for preservice chemistry teachers, and (3) the science competency assessment for students. Data were analyzed using percentage, mean, and standard deviation. The results revealed that the overall teaching competency of preservice chemistry teachers using the small-scale chemistry laboratory kits was at a very high level (x̅ = 4.63, S.D. = 0.486) Additionally, the overall scientific competency of students who received instruction using the small-scale chemistry laboratory kits was as at a high level (x̅ = 2.65, S.D. = 0.478).
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it