MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414499007 · doi:10.26803/ijlter.24.9.40

Cultivating Curiosity and Resilience: Exploring Teachers’ Perspectives in Integrating Instructional Innovation for Learners' Competency Development

2025· article· en· W4414499007 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Chukwudi Ekeh

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Learning Teaching and Educational Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological and Educational Research Studies
Canadian institutionsEducation and Early Childhood Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgency (philosophy)RealisationCuriosityBridge (graph theory)Psychological interventionProfessional developmentLifelong learningSustainability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores primary school teachers' perspectives on integrating technology-enhanced instructional innovations to cultivate curiosity, resilience, and learner competencies in Nigerian classrooms. Utilising an interpretative phenomenological approach, seven purposively selected teachers from a high school in Port Harcourt participated in semi-structured interviews. The findings reveal that teachers actively employ diverse strategies, such as inquiry-based learning, role-play, and digital tools, to foster cognitive, socio-emotional, and ethical growth. However, systemic barriers, including inadequate resources, infrastructural deficiencies, and limited professional development opportunities, impede the full realisation of instructional innovations. Despite these challenges, teacher agency plays a pivotal role in adapting and personalising practices to meet diverse learner needs. The study underscores the importance of differentiated instruction, collaborative learning environments, and targeted policy interventions to bridge the gap between policy aspirations and classroom realities. Sustainable integration of instructional innovation requires robust professional development, collaborative teacher networks, and infrastructural improvements, transforming classrooms into dynamic spaces that equip learners with the competencies needed for 21st-century success.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.019
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.214
GPT teacher head0.515
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 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 venueInternational Journal of Learning Teaching and Educational ResearchSame topicPsychological and Educational Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207