MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970039352 · doi:10.5430/wje.v9n4p123

An Examination of Student Club Activities from the Perspective of School Principals and Teachers

2019· article· en· W2970039352 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
İkram Çınar

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEducation Practices and Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClubRecreationPerspective (graphical)Qualitative researchPedagogyPsychologyCorporate governanceStratified samplingDemocracyData collectionSociologyMedical educationMathematics educationPublic relationsPolitical scienceSocial scienceManagementPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, the effects of student club activities in high schools in Kars province, Turkey on the development ofstudents’ social skills, democracy and governance skills, recreation education and community service skills wereexamined. The qualitative research technique was used in the study and data were collected with the semi-structuredinterview technique. The data were obtained from 8 school principals and 12 club advisors from different schooltypes determined with the maximum variation sampling method. According to the results, the educators in thesample concluded that the student clubs achieved their objectives in the theme of democracy and governance skillsbut were not effective in the other themes. The reasons for this ineffectiveness emerged as deficiencies in thephysical environment in the schools, lack of time allotted for activities, excessive numbers of students in the clubsand unwillingness of teachers with regard to club activities. It was suggested that if the choice of whether or not toengage in club activities is left to students, the activities in clubs will become more attractive and thus theireffectiveness will increase.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of EducationSame topicEducation Practices and ChallengesFrench-language works237,207