Investigating Teacher’s Professional Life Quality Levels in Terms of the Positive Psychological Capital
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
This study, which investigated the relationship between teachers’ professional life qualities and positive psychological capital, was designed in a relational screening pattern in the quantitative research method. Teachers, who worked in primary, secondary and high school in Erzincan city centre of Turkey in 2014-2015 academic year, participated in the research. The study group consisted of totally 182 teachers selected by random sampling method from the research field. The research data were collected through two different scales as “Professional Life Quality” and “Positive Psychological Capital”. The obtained data were subjected to frequency, arithmetic mean, and correlation and regression analysis with SPSS 22 program. According to the results obtained from the research, it was found out that the positive psychological capital levels and quality of professional lives of teachers were high. According to the results of the study, it was noticed that there was a significant positive correlation between the teachers’ professional life qualities and positive psychological capital levels. Another result obtained from the research was that teachers’ professional life qualities were a significant predictor on their positive psychological capitals.
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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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