Relational Factors of Senior Secondary School Students' Preference for Teaching Profession
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the Relational Factors of Students Preference for Teaching Profession. Six hundred Senior Secondary School II students and their parents were selected through multi stage sampling technique. Three instruments were used for data collection: Students Teaching Profession Preference Scale (r = 0.70), Salary and Incentive Scale (r = 0.89) and Parental career value scale (r = 0.51) validated using Cronbach Alpha Reliability Analysis. The data collected were analysed using descriptive statistics and multiple regression. Level of significance was taken to be 0.05. Students’ preference for teaching profession was found to be positive. It was also discovered that teaching profession is rated 5th out of 10 positions by parents. The study also revealed that parental career value, salary and gender compositely predict students’ preference for teaching profession (R=.291; F(3,471) =14.503, p < 0.05).Subsequently when the relative contribution of the independent variables were looked into, only salary was the significant influential variable (salary β = .287, t = 6.498, p < 0.05) while parental career value and gender were not. Based on the findings of this study, it was recommended that government motivate teachers with better salary and provide good working environment to improve the image of teachers. It was also recommended that Government, Policy makers, curriculum planners should set up a scheme to encourage hard working teachers by promoting them annually and sending them on training abroad.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".