Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is a descriptive research executed via scanning model with the purpose of examining geography teachers’ tendency towards reflective thinking according to different variables. Study group consists of 218 geography teachers serving in schools bounded on Ministry of National Education in 2017/2018 education period. As a data collection tool personal information form developed by the researcher and “Reflective Thinking Tendency Scale” were used in this study. Arithmetic average, standard deviation, t-test and one-way variance analysis were used in the analysis of the data obtained. As a result of the research, generally geography teachers are determined to have a high degree of reflective thinking. That, female geography teacher have higher degree of reflective thinking tendency than male geography teachers are determined. It is detected that professional seniority, place of duty and faculty of graduation don’t change geography teachers’ tendency of reflective thinking. While a significant difference for the good of geography teachers serving in other high schools in sub-dimension of the scale “critical and effective teaching” according to the type of duty school Anatolian high school, occupational high school, other high schools (fine arts high school, science high school, social sciences high school, private high schools), there is no significant difference in total scores and other sub-dimensions.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".