Metaphoric Perceptions of School Principals towards Physical Education Term
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract It is very crucial to know how the notion of physical education is perceived by the Principals who are responsible for the school administration and to know the mission and visions they have put on these concepts. The aim of this study is to reveal the metaphoric perceptions of school Principals about physical education concept. The research group is consisted of 153 school principals in Ankara in 2017-2018 academic year. The datum is like “Physical Education is like .........., it is because .......” It was gathered with an open-ended survey containing the sentence. Content analysis technique was used in data analysis and interpretation. In this research, the data were analyzed under the headings of coding and sorting, category development, validity and reliability, data interpretation by taking into consideration the content analysis stages. Metaphors were gathered in 6 different categories as a result of the grouping formed according to the common characteristics of 66 metaphors produced by school Principals related to the concept of Physical Education. Among the metaphors produced by the school principals, it is seen that the most used ones are lesson, activity, power, socialization, discharge and need. Keywords: school management, physical education, metaphor
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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 it