Communication Violence in Verbal Expression and Nonverbal Behavior of Preschool and Early Primary School Teachers During Teaching Process: An Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The teaching process is actually a communication one. It could be interesting or not, pleasant or woeful etc. depending mainly on the teacher’s attitude, his/her verbal expression and nonverbal behavior performed in the classroom. Especially, in children of preschool and early primary school ages, the words a teacher uses in an everyday chat or discussion with students during teaching, the tone of his/her voice and nonverbal behavior may create a positive or negative classroom climate which affects relationships among him/her and the students. This study, based on observations of teachers’ communication behavior during teaching process, focuses on the way they choose to communicate with children and on their verbal expressions in regard to classroom climate conditions. Also, the study focuses on teachers’ nonverbal behaviors, which like nonverbal communication aspects, affect the relationships among classroom participants in school environment. Emphasis is given on teachers’ verbal expressions and nonverbal behaviors that may lead to communication violence and bullying because teachers are more than often behavioral patterns especially for preschoolers and very young elementary school children (pupils).
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".