Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this research is to discover how Practical Reasoning Home Economics Instruction(PRHEI) applied to food and nutrition units would impact on the morality of female high school students. The research sample was drawn from the two freshman classes of M High School for Girls, located in the Pusan area. One classroom of 50 students was used as the test group and the other of 47 as the control group, for the total of 97 students. Measuring the intellectual and behavioral morality scores followed the pre-post test design under which the PRHEI was administered to the test group during the period of eight weeks in a semester. Whereas the control group received the conventional lecture-oriented instruction during the same period. The effects of PRHEI on morality were measured using the system developed in 1972 by Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, and translated by Kim. Ahn-Jung in 1982. The system developed by Yang. Byung-Han in 1994 was utilized to measure the behavioral morality score. In analyzing the collected data, SPSS/WIN was used to generate means, standard deviation, and t-test. The research findings are as follows: First. The students who have been taught under the PRHEI score higher on the intellectual morality scale than the control group receiving the lecture-oriented instruction. Second, The test group students do not show any notable differences from the control group students receiving the lecture-oriented approach on the behavioral morality scale: however, the former do show statistically significant differences from the latter in the sub-factor of honesty, scoring higher means over the control group.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".