An Analysis of Secondary School Students’ Anxiety Levels According to Parameters of Gender, Grade Level, Socioeconomic Level and Reading Frequency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study is to examine the reading anxiety levels of secondary school students according to parameters of gender, grade level, socioeconomic level and reading frequency. The total number of participants of the study is 598 who are students in a secondary school from different grade levels. In this study, reading anxiety scale and personal information form is used. The collected data is analyzed by using independent t-test, one-way analysis of variance and Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient. Just as the first result of the study, it has been found that the reading anxiety levels of secondary school students are low. No significant difference has been found between the levels of students’ reading anxiety and the levels of gender and grade. However, the students’ reading anxiety levels has differed significantly in favor of those with high socioeconomic level. According to the latest finding obtained from the study, the reading anxiety levels of the students has differed significantly in favor of those who have low reading frequency. Therefore, students reading less have more reading anxiety. These results obtained from the study are discussed as stated to the literature.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".