Görme Engelli Öğrencilerde zaman Yönetiminin Aktivite Performansı ve Katılımla İlişkisi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of our study was to analyze the relationship between time management and occupational performance and participation. Materials and Method: 10 volunteers from Hacettepe University have been included in this study. Time management inventory and Canada occupational performance scale were applied to the volunteers. Volunteers have participated in a four-week interference plan which used face to face interview technique once a week. After this period, occupational performance and participation was analyzed and evaluated for the second time. Results: The study is still continuing and, based on the feedback obtained from the volunteers, the researchers have observed that this interference has effect on occupational performance. conclusion: People need time when they do activities in activity performance areas. The time spent for these activities may vary depending on the difficulty and importance of the activity. Using time properly is important for performance in activity areas. Visually impaired students need time management in doing their activities as other people do in their social and academic lives
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".