Perspective of Teachers and Parents on Darsak Platform in Achieving the Educational Outcomes for Kindergarteners
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Limited research has examined the perspectives of teachers and parents on the effectiveness of e-learning platforms in achieving educational outcomes for kindergarteners. This study sought to evaluate the views of teachers and parents regarding the effectiveness of the Darsak platform in supporting educational outcomes in kindergarten settings. A descriptive-analytical approach was adopted, involving 133 participants from Al-Karak Province, including 43 teachers and 90 parents. Data were collected through custom-designed questionnaires comprising: the Teachers’ Perspective Questionnaire and the Parents’ Perspective Questionnaire. The findings revealed that teachers and parents generally had unfavorable perceptions of the platform’s effectiveness in improving educational outcomes for kindergarteners, with parents reporting a mean score of 1.62 (SD = 0.68) and teachers reporting a mean score of 1.92 (SD = 0.73). Additionally, no significant differences (α = 0.05) in perspectives were observed based on gender, academic qualifications, age, or years of experience. Based on the study’s findings, it is recommended that training programs be provided for teachers and parents to enhance their proficiency in using online platforms. Measures such as offering free devices and internet access for low-income families, improving platform quality to align with educational needs, and addressing teachers’ financial challenges to boost job satisfaction are also suggested. Further research is encouraged to explore the perspectives of teachers and parents across all Jordanian kindergartens for more comprehensive results. Future studies should also consider additional variables, such as family size, access to electronic devices, and internet connectivity, to gain deeper insights into this issue.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".