MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1861942096 · doi:10.47678/cjhe.v30i1.183347

A Scale to Assess Student Perceptions of Academic Climates

2000· article· en· W1861942096 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Teresa Janz, Sandra W. Pyke

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Higher Education · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCommunication in Education and Healthcare
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsScale (ratio)AlienationPsychologySocial psychologyClassroom climatePerceptionReliability (semiconductor)Organisation climateHigher educationValidityMathematics educationDevelopmental psychologyPsychometricsGeographyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sandler and Hall (1986) define a chilly academic climate as the "... subtle ways women are treated differently — ways that communicate to women that they are not quite first-class citizens in the academic community" (p. 1). This paper describes the construction of a scale to assess university students' perceptions of the chilly climate. An initial pool of 123 items was refined based on statistical analyses of the responses of 192 students to produce a 28-item Perceived Chilly Climate Scale (PCCS). Factor analysis identified five factors: Climate Students Hear About; Sexist Treatment; Climate Students Experience Personally; Classroom Climate; and Safety. To investigate further the reliability and validity of the scale, the PCCS, an Alienation Scale (Dean, 1961) and the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (Reynolds, 1982) responses were gathered from 327 students. As expected, the PCCS was significantly related to alienation but unrelated to socially desirable responding. Additional evidence supporting the reliability and validity of the PCCS is presented.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.404 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations34
Published2000
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Higher EducationSame topicCommunication in Education and HealthcareFrench-language works237,207