MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2923608314 · doi:10.5539/ies.v12n4p100

The Difficulties That the Teachers Who Continue Master of Science Education Experience

2019· article· en· W2923608314 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Murat ÇALIŞOĞLU, Abdul Samet Yalvaç

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEducation Practices and Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttendanceMedical educationPsychologyPresentation (obstetrics)Higher educationChristian ministryProfessional developmentIncentiveSpecialtyData collectionQualitative researchTeacher educationPedagogyMathematics educationSociologyMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Postgraduate education includes Master's, PhD, specialty in medicine and proficiency in art after the undergraduate education. Postgraduate education is a high-level education program that provides a specialization in the field of science in which students are interested following a four-year undergraduate program in faculties. Teachers also continue their postgraduate education in order to improve themselves and to make a professional contribution. The purpose of this study is to determine the difficulties encountered by teachers who are continuing their graduate education. The research group consists of 29 teachers working in Ministry of National Education and continued master’s with thesis education in 2017-2018 academic years, and they were selected with purposeful sampling. In the study, the qualitative research method was used. The data collection tool consisted of the personal information protocol and the interview form consisting of 5 open-ended questions developed by the researcher. In the presentation of the data, the frequency and percentage values of the personal information of the participants were tabulated. As a result of the study, it was determined that the participants had problems such as the distance between the university and the school, the training being a tiring process, the problem of attendance and the inadequacy of the incentives to complete the education and the inadequacy of the rights given in the case of the completion of the education.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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