The Reality of Secondary Education in Jordan from the Perspective of Secondary School Principals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study aims at assessing the reality of secondary education in Jordan from the high school principals’ perspective, in addition to figuring out the impact of the gender differences on the results. To answer the study questions; the researcher selected the study sample using the stratified random method. The sample consisted of 73 headmaster and headmistress of secondary school from the southern governorates of Jordan (Ma’an, Al Shoubak, Petra, Southern Badia, and Aqaba) for the academic year 2017/2018. The researcher developed a questionnaire consisted of (35) paragraphs, divided into five fields: (building and equipment, students, teaching staff, curricula and educational supervision) and for the combined fields as well. The results of the study revealed the following: (1) Principals’ assessment of the two fields of building and equipment, and students, and for the fields combined was high (2) Principals’ assessment of teaching staff, curricula, and educational supervision was medium (3) Principals’ assessment of the questionnaire was not affected by the gender.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".