Factor Analytic Study of Lecturer’s Teaching Assessment Scale in Obafemi Awolowo University, Nigeria
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 study presents a validation report of the Lecturer’s Teaching Assessment Scale (LTAS) developed for theassessment of lecturer’s teaching effectiveness in Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria. It also examinedthe factor structure of the LTAS, its construct validity, and internal consistency reliability coefficients. The studyadopted the survey research design. A total of 13,000 students that completed the LTAS online constituted thesample for the study. The 34-item LTAS was used to collect data for the study. Collected data were subjected toreliability and factor analyses. Results showed that the LTAS has two subscales - Attitude to Teaching and LecturePresentation and Organisation. The LTAS was adjudged to possess construct validity, and it was established throughexperts’ judgement. The results also revealed that the LTAS was reliable (Cronbach Alpha reliability coefficient of0.985, Spearman Brown’s Split-half reliability coefficient of 0.998 and Gutman’s Split-half coefficient of 0.997).Thus, the LTAS possessed adequate psychometric qualities that make it suitable for use among Nigerianundergraduate students.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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