Psychosocial Programmes and Employees Retirement Preparedness: Empirical Evidence From the Educational Sector in Kenya
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Retirement is a process with employees planning decisions generally focusing on the subjective life expectancy, a mental model of years remaining before one dies. Indeed, the real exit of an individual from a career job is accompanied by changes that include social and psychological, resources leading to variations in an individual’s well-being. The purpose of this study was to assess how employees’ engagement in psychosocial programmes affects their retirement preparedness in the education sector in Kenya. The target population was 1,238 teachers aged 50 years and above and employed in public secondary schools by the Teachers Service Commission in Kirinyaga and Murang’a Counties by 2017. A representative sample of 334 respondents was selected using multistage sampling technique. Data was collected using semi structured questionnaire and interview guide. Logit regression was used to establish the relationships between variables in the study and to test the null hypotheses at P ≤ 0.05 confidence level. The findings indicate that even though the sampled pre-retiree teachers were not adequately prepared for retirement psychosocially, yet their engagement in psychosocial programmes increases their retirement preparedness level. The reported findings extend the current understanding of employee separation programmes and raise implications for the various theories that underpin employee separation decisions in HRM.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".