Teacher Professionalism and Professional Development Practices in South Sulawesi, Indonesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates teachers’ professionalism and professional development practices which still have lowerquality based on the law and do not produce an improved performance yet in South Sulawesi, Indonesia. Thisinvestigation focuses on teachers’ behavior-attitude, pedagogic skills, and diversity learning activities througheffective professional development as commitment to do continuous improvement. The supporting factors and theconstraints of being professional teacher are also identified. The design of this study employs exploratory mixedmethod design with triangulation approach. Simple random sampling is occupied in choosing 331 samples out of2367 population to answer the questionnaires. While twelve teachers were selected using purposive sampling forinterview and observation. The t-test and Anova analysis show that gender has significant different inbehavior-attitude practice, while education professional qualification is significant on both behavior-attitude andteachers’ learning activities. The qualitative findings show the need to display exemplary behavior-attitude, strengthteaching skill, knowledge and beliefs through diversity learning activities in effective professional development.Teacher professional development needs supporting on policy, moral, infrastructure, and financial that can leadteachers to be professional. This study has provided a model of teacher professional development as an input forimproving the quality practice of teacher professionalism and professional development in Indonesia, particularly inSouth Sulawesi province.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".