MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2917979556 · doi:10.5539/ies.v12n3p90

Student Teachers’ Preparedness to Teach: The Case of Turkey

2019· article· en· W2917979556 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Öznur Ataş Akdemir

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEducation Practices and Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreparednessTurkishMathematics educationPsychologyDescriptive statisticsTest (biology)Significant differenceMedical educationScale (ratio)Likert scaleData collectionMathematicsMedicineStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this research, it is aimed to investigate the level of student teachers’ preparedness to teach in terms of different variables. To this end, a descriptive survey study is conducted with 211 undergraduate students studying at the faculty of education of a Turkish public university. The data is collected with The Preparedness to Teach Scale. Standard deviation, arithmetic mean, frequency, percentage, t test, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Scheffe and LSD (Least Significant Difference) test are used in data analysis procedure. According to the results, it is found that student teachers’ level of preparedness to teach, understanding learner, designing effective learning environment, designing the process of teaching and technopedagogical competencies are at sufficient level. Additionally, while there isn’t any difference between the levels of student teachers’ preparedness to teach in terms of gender, there are some differences between them in terms of their departments and class levels. Some suggestions based on the result of the present study are directed at researchers and practitioners.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicEducation Practices and ChallengesFrench-language works237,207