MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765764714 · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v6n5p181

Degree of Practice of Emotional and Spiritual Education by Faculty Members of Tafila Technical University and Its Role in Development of Self-Behavior from the Perspective of Students

2017· article· en· W2765764714 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hani Kraimeen, Abd Al Raheem Al-Mhasnah

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Higher Education · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Islamic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)PsychologySample (material)Emotional supportMedical educationSocial psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to identify practice of emotional and spiritual education by faculty members of Tafila Technical University and its relation in development of students' self-behavior in light of some variables like gender and specialization.To achieve the goal of the study, a questionnaire was prepared to collect information to be distributed to a random sample consisting of 227 students (males and females) in Tafila Technical University (TTU) in the academic year 2016/2017. The study concludes that the degree of practice of emotional and spiritual education and self-behavior by faculty members of TTU is medium and that there is a correlation between spiritual & emotional values and self-behavior. According to these results, the study provides some recommendations including: to include contents of spiritual and emotional education in training programs for the faculty members of TTU, to develop teaching methods in universities in a manner that agrees with the moral curve that motivates students to develop self-discipline skills.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.376 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Higher EducationSame topicEducation and Islamic StudiesFrench-language works237,207