MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W642331810

DRAWING PREDICTIVE DETERMINANTS OF COLLEGE ADJUSTMENT: PERSPECTIVES FROM TWO PRIVATE SECTARIAN COLLEGIATE INSTITUTIONS

2012· article· en· W642331810 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jesús Alfonso, D. Datu

Notice bibliographique

RevueResearchers World – Journal of Arts Science & Commerce · 2012
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiquePersonality Traits and Psychology
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPsychologyTest (biology)PopulationPreferencePersonalitySocial psychologyHigher educationStyle (visual arts)SociologyDemography
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

ABSTRACTThe paper describes the relationship among Big five personality factors, paternal parenting style and career preference to college adjustment of selected Filipino college freshmen. Two hundred college students (n=200) who were part of the larger population of individuals aged from 15 to 23 at two sectarian private institutions in Metro Manila were selected and asked to answer Big Five Inventory (BFI), Parental Authority Questionnaire (PAQ) and College Adjustment Test (CAT). The study employed a descriptive-predictive research design to measure the degree of correlation among such variables and to identify if what among these independent variables can predict adjustment of the respondents to collegiate life. After subjecting data into statistical analyses via SPSS 17.0 software, it was revealed that college adjustment is significantly associated with gender (n=.14, pKeywords: Big five personality factors, career preference, paternal parenting style, college adjustment.INTRODUCTION:Adjustment to college is a dynamic process of systematically employing one's innate resources in responding to the academic, social and psychological challenges. It comprises meeting new people and acquiring significant experiences. Academically speaking, first year in college presents wonderful opportunities to know different academic disciplines (Hartman & Stewart, 2006). Although the chance of getting a clearer picture of the intended fields of endeavor appeared to be very promising (Abdullah et al., 2009; Nuthanap, 2007), the difference between high school and collegiate niche might predispose college freshmen to experience a lot of changes that can lead to problems. Consequently, there are many students who are unable to complete their studies. In relation to this, a study conducted by Wintre and Bowers (2007) on the persistence to graduate amongst 944 undergraduate students in a Canadian university reported that within six years, 57.9% of the students had graduated, 9% remained enrolled, and 33.1% were neither enrolled nor graduated which can be attributed to variety of factors that are suggestive of one's coping capabilities. Additionally, Smith and Renk (2007) have found out that the combination of many stressors of university life, such as planning for the future, struggling with exams and assignments, coping with demands and challenging professors, deciding on a major, and transitioning into financial and emotional independence, can be an overwhelming experience for many students. Hence, almost all new students go through an adjustment phase upon entry to a university with each student varied in his or her own pace of development (Blimling & Miltenberger, cited in Dyson & Renk, 2006). As part of the university administrators' pursuit to ensure that the students' retention rate is adequate to sustain the vital academic and extracurricular functions of their respective institutions without compromising its commitment to quality education, determination of the factors that are imperative in predicting how well enrolled students can cope with the demands of academic community and implementation of career guidance programs that would address how students will be able to effectively cope with diverse academic requirements were enunciated to be common interventions that are employed by such institutions to diminish the number of students who are withdrawing from their classes (Toews & Yazedjian, 2007). …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,406
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,003
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,177
Tête enseignante GPT0,452
Écart entre enseignants0,275 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations5
Publié2012
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueResearchers World – Journal of Arts Science & CommerceMême sujetPersonality Traits and PsychologyTravaux en français237 207