MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002956538 · doi:10.5430/wje.v2n2p41

Attitude of Retiring Headmasters and Assistant Headmasters Towards Family Involvement in Pre-retirement Preparation in Ondo State, Nigeria

2012· article· en· W2002956538 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Onijuni Olufemi Olatomide, Adeola Shobola, Michael Adeniyi Omoyemiju

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Education · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHappinessDescriptive statisticsPsychologyData collectionDescriptive researchGovernment (linguistics)State (computer science)Social psychologySociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The family is a paramount source of happiness, giving individuals a sense of place that is relevant to developing satisfaction and fulfilment. Consequently, this study examined the attitude of retiring HeadMasters and Assistant HeadMasters’ towards family involvement in pre-retirement preparation in Ondo State, Nigeria. Using descriptive survey, 150 participants were purposively drawn from three Local Government Areas accidentally selected for the study. ’’Family Involvement in Pre-retirement Preparation Questionnaire (FIPPQ)’’ was used for data collection. Data collected were analysed using descriptive statistics, t-test, and ANOVA. Descriptive results indicated participants’ general poor knowledge on the need for family involvement in pre-retirement preparation, positive attitude towards family involvement and low actual involvement of their family in pre-retirement planning. Results of the tested hypotheses revealed that sex, educational qualification, and religion had no significant influence on the participants’ attitude towards family involvement in pre-retirement preparation .Recommendations were made based on these findings.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.684

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.265 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of EducationSame topicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement AnalysisFrench-language works237,207