Motivational Influences to Pursue Graduate Studies in Secondary Music Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Motivational influences on the decision to pursue graduate studies in secondary music education were investigated. The population of secondary music education graduate students in one large Canadian university (N=13) completed a survey that included both open-ended and closed-ended response items. The greatest motivational influences to pursue graduate studies were found to be: (a) intellectual development, (b) personal development, and (c) professional development. The motivational influence Need to Refresh showed the most diversity and elicited the most prose response. Standard deviations indicated that on most items the response group was homogeneous. All results were consistent across gender and degree program, master’s or doctoral. In contrast to similar studies of educators in general, the influence of Potential Monetary Gain was not identified as important. Demographic information supplied by respondents indicated that the typical secondary music education graduate student in this university was 30 or more years of age and had five to 14 years of teaching experience. Results of this study cannot be generalized beyond the population from which the data were collected.
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 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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".