Social Studies Course from the Perspective of Parents -The Istanbul-Sultanbeyli Case
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study is to identify the perspectives of parents on the "Social Studies" course. The case study design,one of the qualitative research methods, was used in accordance with the nature of the study. Data related to the studywere obtained through a semi-structured interview form prepared by the researchers. The data of the study wereobtained from the parents of students attending 5th, 6th and 7th grade of a state secondary school located in theIstanbul-Sultanbeyli district in the spring semester of 2017 and 2018 academic year. The data obtained were analyzedby content analysis. According to the data obtained from the research, the following results were obtained: Themajority of the parents apparently linked the concept of Social Studies to the concepts of History, Geography,Citizenship and Socialization. Parents thought that the subjects related to History, Geography, Citizenship Rights,Culture, Democracy, Human Rights and the life of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk were taught in the Social Studies course.Nevertheless, it was seen that the parents wished to see the concepts such as Love of Motherland, Nation, Communityand National Flag, Etiquette, Cultural Values, Freedom, Democracy, Equality to be taught in the Social Studies courses.While the parents mostly compared the Social Studies courses with such organs as the Brain, Kidney, Heart, Eye,Stomach and Intestine, they considered it as appropriate to place this course in the last places in terms of importance. Inaddition, it was found that majority of the parents did not want their children to become social studies teachers in thefuture.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".