MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116899879 · doi:10.5539/jel.v15n3p103

Constructing and Validating a Flipped and Collaborative Learning Model for Fostering Instructional Design Skills of Chinese Pre-Service Physics Teachers

2025· article· W7116899879 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstructional designFlipped classroomConsistency (knowledge bases)Educational technologyCommunity of inquiryInstructional simulationCollaborative learningStrengths and weaknessesReliability (semiconductor)Mastery learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to develop and validate an instructional model integrating a flipped classroom and collaborative learning approaches to enhance instructional design skills of Chinese pre-service physics teachers. Before developing the model, structured questionnaires and semi-structured interviews were used to collect data from teachers’ and pre-service physics teachers’ perspectives on classroom management to enhancing instructional design skill. Results indicated strong awareness of instructional design and appreciation for digital tools and feedback, but revealed weaknesses in pre-class preparation, collaboration, and classroom engagement. Developing instructional model components consisted of six key aspects include generating model principles, defining learning objectives, designing learning steps, examining the roles of teachers and students, and developing assessment methods to evaluate learning. The instructional model was validate by five experts using standardized rating forms, yielding high average scores (4.00–5.00) and strong reliability (ICC = 0.79–0.87), confirming its theoretical soundness and contextual relevance. Lesson plans were designed to structure and guide instruction, aligning with the instructional model’s principles and learning steps. Seven lesson plans received the average appropriateness score 4.20–5.00 with good consistency (ICC = 0.76), demonstrating strong alignment and feasibility. After complete experts’ validation, the lesson plans were piloted with 40 students. The pilot phase showed high actively engagement that suggests the model are feasible and acceptable to participants. This is a positive indicator for the implementation phase. The study offers a practical and scalable framework for instructional design training in teacher education.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.558
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.364 · 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