Learning Activity Model Using Design Thinking Process to Develop Innovative Thinking Skills of Pre-service Teachers
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research aimed to (1) create and determine the efficiency of a learning activity model using design thinking process to develop innovative thinking skills of pre-service teachers according to the 75/75 criteria, and (2) develop innovative thinking skills of pre-service teachers using the model. The research followed the Research and Development (R&D) approach in two phases. Phase 1 involved creating and determining model efficiency with 39 second-year English major pre-service teachers from Lampang Rajabhat University (semester 2/2021), selected through purposive sampling. Phase 2 involved implementing the model with 85 second-year English major pre-service teachers (semester 2/2022). Both groups enrolled in Material Development and Learning Innovations in English Language Teaching. Research instruments included the learning activity model using design thinking process, an innovative thinking skills assessment form, and a test. Data were analyzed using percentage, mean, and standard deviation. Research findings revealed that the created model consisted of six stages: 1) Journey into Learners’ World, 2) Innovation Spark Targeting, 3) Creative Explosion, 4) Learning Sculpture, 5) Real-World Testing, and 6) Reflect and Share. The model demonstrated an efficiency rating of 77.28/80.37, exceeding the 75/75 criteria. Pre-service teachers demonstrated overall innovative thinking skills at a good level (mean = 2.32, S.D. = 0.52). When comparing post-learning test scores with the established criteria, pre-service teachers achieved a mean score of 15.02 (S.D. = 0.93), representing 75.12%, which exceeded the established 75% criterion.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it