MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955382245 · doi:10.5430/wje.v9n3p131

Comparison of Emotional Intelligence Levels and Problem Solving Skills of Prospective Teachers According to Different Variables

2019· article· en· W2955382245 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicProblem Solving Skills Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmotional intelligencePsychologyScale (ratio)Class (philosophy)Intelligence quotientMathematics educationDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyCognitionComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IQ is considered as a true criterion of intelligence while emotional intelligence is considered as a decisive in order tobe happy and successful in life. It is of interest to the educational system that emotional intelligence can bedeveloped at the same time. Emotional intelligence gained in the family will help to improve the school life,overcome the obstacles that people will encounter in their lives and solve the problems. In this study, emotionalintelligence levels and problem solving skills of the prospective teachers were examined according to differentvariables. In this study, the cross sectional survey design was used to investigate the research questions with 1033prospective teachers, 813 of whom were women and 220 were men, who agreed to participate in the study. The studygroup was chosen from the students of education faculty of the public university located near the black see region ofTurkey. As a means of collecting data, the Bar-On Emotional Intelligence Scale, the Problem Solving Scale, and thePersonal Information Form were used to obtain data from the participants. As a result of the study, the problemsolving skills of prospective teachers don’t differ according to gender and the class level; It was also found thatemotional intelligence did not differ according to gender and the class level, but it had a significant differenceaccording to age and department variables. In line with these results, in order to educate teachers with high level ofemotional intelligence and problem solving skills, attention should be paid to the emotional characteristics of theteacher candidates. The change of emotional intelligence with different factors should be examined in follow upstudies.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.461

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.372 · 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