Examination of Classroom Management Approaches of Social Studies Teachers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, the v0iews of social studies teachers about the autocratic, democratic and irrelevant classroom management approaches were examined. For this purpose, it was investigated whether the opinions of the social studies teachers about the classroom management approaches differed according to their gender and seniority. This research employed a descriptive research model. The sample of the study consisted of 83 teachers working in various schools in Bursa. In this study, the “teachers’ understanding of classroom management survey” developed by Terzi and composed of two sections and a total of 38 items was used. The data of the study was analyzed in the SPSS program by using the significance level of .05. By using one-sample t-test in the pairwise comparisons, it was aimed to determine whether there was a difference between the teachers’ classroom management understandings and their personal characteristics. In the comparison of more than two sets, one-way analysis of variance was applied. As a result of the study, no significant difference was found between the social studies teachers’ classroom management approaches according to the variable of gender. The female and the male social studies teachers demonstrated their autocratic, democratic and irrelevant classroom management understandings at the same level. According to the variable of professional seniority, it was found out that the teachers with a professional seniority of between 16-20 years exhibited their democratic classroom management approaches at a higher level.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".