Examination of the Self-Efficacy of Primary School Teacher Candidates towards First Reading-Writing Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study is to examine the levels of the self-efficacy of primary school teacher candidates towards first reading-writing education and whether they differentiate by various variables. The study is prepared in accordance with the screening model. The universe of this study consists of the primary school teacher candidates who receive education at an Education Faculty of a public university in Istanbul province. As for the sample, it consists of 124 primary school teacher candidates who receive education at the Education Faculty of two public universities in Istanbul province. As for the data collection tool, the “Self-efficacy towards First Reading-Writing Education Scale” developed by Delican (2016) was employed in this study. As a result of the study, there is not a significant difference between the self-efficacies of the primary school teacher candidates towards first reading-writing education depending on their age. The self-efficacy of the primary school teacher candidates towards first reading-writing education creates a significant difference depending on the gender variable. In the preparation, practice and assessment sub-dimensions and on the scale overall, the self-efficacy of females towards first reading-writing education is higher when compared to males. There is a significant difference depending on the variable of the grade in which the primary school teacher candidates receive an education. The self-efficacy of the primary school teacher candidates who study in the 3rd grade towards first reading-writing education is higher when compared to the primary school teacher candidates in the 4th grade. There is not a significant difference between the self-efficacy of the primary school teacher candidates towards first reading-writing education depending on the variable of thinking that teaching first reading-writing to primary school first grades is a hard work. The self-efficacy of the primary school teacher candidates who have previously helped their siblings or nephews during the process of learning first reading and writing towards first reading-writing education is higher in regard to the practice and assessment sub-dimensions and the scale overall. It was observed that the self-efficacy of the primary school teacher candidates towards first reading-writing education in regard to the preparation and practice sub-dimensions and the scale overall was high; the self-efficacy of the primary school teacher candidates towards first reading-writing education according to the assessment sub-dimension was at a quite high level.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".