MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991397076 · doi:10.5430/jms.v10n5p40

A Study of Job Satisfaction of Academicians

2019· article· en· W2991397076 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bhavik Swadia, Jaimin Patel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management and Strategy · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOrganizational and Employee Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoyaltySyllabusJob satisfactionPremiseIntrospectionPsychologyDirectiveWork (physics)CurriculumHuman resource managementMedical educationPublic relationsKnowledge managementPedagogyBusinessMarketingEngineeringPolitical scienceComputer scienceSocial psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Every management face challenges daily, but there are some challenges which are customary to every management. One from such common problems confronted by the management while managing employees (teachers) include - Job satisfaction & Employee Loyalty. The invaluable resource that any institute possesses is its work force; indeed, an employee’s longer work experience at the same corporate enhances his worth. The primary qualities a teacher possesses include being introspective, being cooperative, being directive and being expressive. A syllabus which is effective and a curriculum that is well planned is only fruitful with availability of teachers who are meticulous in their duties. Knowledge alone cannot be the basis for gauging the ability of a teacher. There are other factors too like whether the teacher is comfortable in handling the profession that impacts the effectiveness of the system. With many research works having taken place in this zone with multiple organizations, what we lack is a distinct research on satisfaction at job which needs to be taken up.Hence, we conducted a research where we took a sample size containing 50 teachers and performed the survey on the premise of systematic sampling. The method followed in the process of acquiring and assembly of data was structured questionnaire method.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management and StrategySame topicOrganizational and Employee PerformanceFrench-language works237,207