The Understanding of Curriculum Philosophy among Trainee Teachers in Regards to Soft Skills Embedment
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Curriculum philosophy may assist in learning practices that coincide with the philosophy of educational institution and community. This study was aimed to understand how the teacher trainees who pursued Bachelor of Teaching (PISMP) understand the embedment of soft skills into learning activities for core courses in Malaysian Institutes of Teacher Education (IPGMs). This is necessary because embedding soft skills is sometimes considered to be out of interest among the teacher trainees that may lead to neglect the aspects of soft skills development among them. The study was conducted using a case study methodology through the qualitative approach. The respondents comprised of nine teacher trainees from the final year of study. The results yielded the teacher trainees’ beliefs and identified the ways soft skills were embedded among them as they pursued their course. The results of this study allowed those involved in the development of teacher trainees’ soft skills to generate ideas to develop a model to embed soft skills, in line with the interpretation of soft skills, for the teacher trainees in the IPGM.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 it