MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890897797 · doi:10.5539/jel.v7n6p37

The Effect of ICT Acceptance on Kindergarten Parents’ Empowerment: Deliberative Belief as the Mediator

2018· article· en· W2890897797 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chun-wen Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpowermentInformation and Communications TechnologyPsychologyStructural equation modelingSocial psychologyPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary aim of this study was two-fold: 1) to identify information communication technology (ICT) acceptance of kindergarten parents that influence parents’ deliberative belief and empowerment by applying the socio-technical systems theory as theoretical framework; and 2) to examine the mediated effect of deliberative belief between ICT acceptance and empowerment. A total of 949 elementary school and kindergarten parents in Taiwan were asked to complete questionnaire about their ICT acceptance, deliberative belief, and empowerment. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was utilized to evaluate the validity of structural/ latent model. The results revealed that deliberative belief, mediate the relationship between the ICT acceptance and empowerment among parents. ICT acceptance had effect on deliberative belief, and deliberative belief had the effects on empowerment. According to this information, it is recommended that school administrators should encourage parents and teachers together to improve and enhance their deliberative belief, ICT acceptance that may lead to more positive parents’ empowerment in school governance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.784
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicChild Development and Digital TechnologyFrench-language works237,207