Indicators of Authentic Leadership for Teachers in the General Education Session of Buddhist Scripture Schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research aims to test the fitness of theoretical model of authentic leadership with the empirical data, and investigate the factor loading. The descriptive research methodology was conducted. The data were collected from the 660 samples who are the teachers in the General Education Session of the Buddhist Scripture Schools in Thailand. The data was analyzed using a computer program. The results of the research confirmed the hypotheses of the research which are: the theoretical model is relevant to the empirical data, and the value of Relative Chi-Square (CMIN/DF), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), Goodness-of-Fit Index (GFI), Adjusted Goodness-of-Fit Index (AGFI), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), and (6) Normed Fit Index (NFI) is in accordance with the criteria and 2) the lowest value of factor loading of the major factors is 0.94 which is 0.70 higher than the criteria, the Lowest value of factor loading of the minor factors is 0.58, and the lowest value of the factor loading of the indicators is 0.31 which is 0.30 higher than the criteria. It shows that the theoretical models of Authentic Leadership represents the relationship of the four major factors, 12 minor factors and 71 indicators which can be used for guiding the development of teachers in the General Education Session of the Buddhist Scripture Schools, in construct validity way which has supported by the results of this study.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".