Views of Teacher-Trainees on Clothing and Textiles Education in two Teacher Education Universities in Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study explored the views of teacher-trainees on Clothing and Textiles (C&T) education in two teacher educationuniversities in Ghana. The objectives were to find out whether pre-tertiary Sewing/C&T lessons provided them withsmall-scale business skills, and foundation for higher education, they could teach Sewing/C&T competently oninternship, identify their sources of motivation, and elicit their suggestions to improve on the subject. Data collectedrevealed that one-tenth and two-thirds acquired small-scale business skills from their lessons at basic and secondarylevels respectively. About 71% indicated they taught the subject competently on internship and career intention wastheir main motivating factor for the subject. For improvement, there is need to provide adequate modern facilities andcompetent teachers with current ideas in content and pedagogy, and good teacher relationship with students andindustry. Other suggestions were, students should remain focused and attract others to the subject through theirdressing. Feed-back from the teacher trainees indicates that Sewing/C&T education in Ghana provides occupationalskills and foundation for further studies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".