Analysis on the Bullying Tendencies and Value Preferences of High School Students According To Level of Receiving Physical Education and Sports Course
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the bullying tendencies and value preferences of high school students according to the level of taking physical education and sports course.The research population of the study was composed of high school students studying in Yesilyurt and Battalgazi districts of Malatya province during 2013-2014 academic year. Sample stratified sampling method was used in the sample selection. In order to collect the necessary data for the research, Personal Information Form, Schwartz Portrait Values Survey and Bullying Tendencies Scale were used.In the study, the distribution of the scores belonging to dependent variables at the pores of the subunits of the independent variables was analyzed in terms of the assumptions of normality. In the analysis process, non-parametric statistical methods were preferred. For this purpose, data were tested in accordance with the sub-problems of the research using descriptive analysis (mean and standard deviation) and non-parametric analysis such as Mann-Whitney U test and Kruskal Wallis H test. In analysis of the data, statistical package software program was used and the significance level of p<.05 was taken.A significant level of difference was found between total value scores of students according to their classes and the number physical education and sports courses taken by those students. A significant level of difference was found between total bullying tendency scores of students by their genders, the number physical education and sports courses taken by those students and the students' family income. A significant level of difference was found between total bullying tendency scores of students by the type of schools they attend. A significant level of difference was found between total value scores of students according to the type of schools they attend. A moderate negative relationship was found between the total value scores and total bullying tendency scores of students. Accordingly, as the total value scores of student increase, their bullying tendency scores decrease.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".