MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410967498 · doi:10.21083/ajote.v14i1.8013

Teachers’ preparedness for implementing the Educational Coding and Robotics curriculum in South Africa

2025· article· en· W4410967498 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
William Zivanayi, Serah Ntombikayise Malinga

Bibliographic record

VenueAfrican Journal of Teacher Education · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOpen Education and E-Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreparednessCoding (social sciences)CurriculumRoboticsArtificial intelligenceMathematics educationComputer scienceEngineeringPedagogySociologyPolitical sciencePsychologyRobotSocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is a significant step that the Department of Basic Education has taken to integrate educational coding and robotics into the mainstream school curricula in a world where technology is a normal element of everyday life. A deeper examination of the schools' and teachers' readiness to adopt this new curriculum is significant to improve learning and boost active teaching techniques. The article aimed to examine the teachers’ preparedness, interests, knowledge, and self-confidence in implementing the newly introduced learning area – Educational coding and robotics in the mainstream school curriculum. This study was framed in the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Using a systematic review approach, articles obtained from PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, Scielo, Scopus, and ERIC were critically analyzed to identify descriptive themes and analytical themes. The review showed that the attitudes of South African teachers on ECR hinge on the availability of resources, pedagogical computer skills, teachers’ technological beliefs, and the management team's influences on technology. DBE needs to work closely with the teachers’ training institutions and pedagogical experts to meet the needs of teachers and learners regarding educational coding and robotics curriculum. Engagement with teachers may increase their knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values for them to have a meaningful contribution to the educational coding and robotics curriculum.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score0.320

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAfrican Journal of Teacher EducationSame topicOpen Education and E-LearningFrench-language works237,207