MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413506483 · doi:10.5430/jct.v14n3p352

Test Anxiety Among Post-Basic Education Students With Learning Disabilities at Sultanate of Oman

2025· article· en· W4413506483 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ahmad Alfawair, Tamadher Al Alawi, Somaiya Al Riyami

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Teaching · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealth and Well-being Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Nizwa
KeywordsTest anxietyAnxietyTest (biology)PsychologyMedical educationLearning disabilityClinical psychologyMathematics educationMedicineDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to identify the level of test anxiety among post-basic education students with learning disabilities (LD) in the Sultanate of Oman. A descriptive design (survey) was adopted. The study sample consists of 299 students with LD who were selected randomly. The survey used in this study includes 41 negative items divided into four dimensions (psychological, social, physical, and mental). The results showed a moderate level of test anxiety for post-basic education students with LD. The results also showed that there are statistically significant differences between males and females in the level of test anxiety in general, in favor of females. In addition, there are statistically significant differences between males and females in the level of test anxiety in favor of females on four dimensions (social, physical, mental, and psychological dimensions). Given these results, the current study suggested several recommendations. It is essential to conduct counseling programs for parents to educate them on the importance of using modern methods to deal with their children and to hold teacher training workshops regarding modern methods of helping students with LD overcome test anxiety.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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 venueJournal of Curriculum and TeachingSame topicHealth and Well-being StudiesFrench-language works237,207