Physical Education Teachers’ Using of Teaching Styles Levels and Their Perceptions Towards Styles in Public and Private Schools in Turkey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this research is to determine the using of teaching styles of physical education teachers in public andprivate schools in Turkey and related to these styles to find out the value perceptions. The research was performedout with survey model. The research group consisted of simple random sampling method based on the probabilitysampling methods 2017-2018 Academic Year in Turkey in Kayseri province 109 of them work at public schools and47 of them work at private schools and totally 156 physical education teachers. As the data collection tool the“Physical Education Teachers Use of Teaching Styles and Perceptions of Styles Questionnaire”, developed byKulinna and Cothran (2003) and adapted to Turkish by Ince and Hunuk (2010), was used in the research. In theanalysis of the data the Arithmetic mean, standard deviation, independent t-test and variance analysis tests were usedfor repeated measurements. The meaningfulness level was adopted as α=0.05. As a result of the research, it wasdetermined that physical education teachers in public and private schools use teaching centered teaching styles.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".