The Status quo of the Application of the Jordanian Universities to Electronic Management from the Point of View of the Faculty Members
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to know the status quo of the application of the Jordanian universities to E-Management from the viewpoint of the faculty members. The study used the descriptive approach by which a resolution of 28 paragraphs has been developed, and the truthfulness and consistency of the tool was validated, its sample of the faculty members was formed in Jordanian universities represented at the University of Jordan, Yarmouk University, and Mu'tah University, a number of 300 persons has been selected randomly. The study concluded the following results: The results of mean averages and standard deviations have shown that status quo of the application of E-Management by Jordanian universities from the viewpoint of faculty members is moderate. The results showed that there were no statistically significant differences at the level of significance (= 0.05 α) in the study sample estimates in the fact that the Jordanian universities applied E-Management from the viewpoint of the faculty members due to the gender variable and found statistically significant differences at the level of significance (= 0.05 α) due to the variable of the college and for the benefit of the scientific faculties, for the benefit of Assistant professor. The study recommended that Jordanian universities should publish an E-Management culture within university units by introducing departments to implement and apply E-Management at the university.
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 | 0.022 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".