University Students’ Perceptions of Teacher Effectiveness and Emotions in Lectures: The Role of Socio-cognitive Factors, and Academic Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined (a) students’ ability self-perceptions, perceptions of domain-difficulty, value beliefs, experienced emotions in lectures and performance in the courses taught by the perceived as extremely effective and ineffective teachers, (b) the role of ability self-perceptions, perceived domain-difficulty and value beliefs in the emotions, rating of teacher effectiveness and impact of perceived teacher effectiveness on emotions, and (c) the effects of the three sets of concepts on performance. The sample comprised of 410 Early Childhood Education female students. The results showed that ability self-perceptions, perceptions of domain-difficulty, value beliefs, experienced emotions in lectures and performance differed between the courses taught by the perceived effective and ineffective teachers, in favoring the effective teachers. Cognitive factors had positive effects on perceived teacher effectiveness, emotions and impact of teacher effectiveness on emotions. The three set of concepts, together, positively influenced performance, while their relative power varied between the two groups of teachers.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".