A Metaphoric Analysis Regarding Gender Perceptions of Preservice Teachers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the study is to determine the gender perceptions of preservice teachers through the metaphors they describe women and men. It is a qualitative study conducted with content analysis. Data was collected through a semi-structured questionnaire from 510 final year students and preservice teachers attending teacher certification program at the Gaziosmanpaşa University Faculty of Education. The study showed that the preservice teachers had gender prejudice supporting the patriarchal family structure. About half of the preservice teachers described women using metaphores emphasizing that women were “slender, sensitive, and needing attention”. Here, the most frequently used metaphore was “flower”. More than a quarter of the preservice teachers (31.2%) described men using metaphores emphasizing that men were “rude, tough, and insensitive”. Here, the most frequently used metaphore was “log”. Also, while both genders had significantly positive perceptions for themselves, they had significantly negative perceptions for the opposite gender. Thus, there is a need to create gender awareness in all parts of the society starting from the education faculties, and to develop policies for gender equality.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".