MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999301281 · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v9n1p237

Anxiety and Stress in In-service Chinese University Teachers of Arts

2020· article· en· W2999301281 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Meihua Liu, Yi Yan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Higher Education · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Professional Development and Motivation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyPsychologyStress (linguistics)ChinaThe artsClinical psychologyService (business)Medical educationScale (ratio)MedicinePsychiatryPolitical scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As revealed by literature, anxiety and stress are complicated yet serious issues among teachers at all educational levels. Though widely studied, research on them often focuses on pre-service or primary and middle school teachers, with little research on in-service university teachers. It is especially so in China. The present study thus examined anxiety, stress and their relations with demographic variables in in-service university teachers in China. 256 teachers from various universities in China answered the Demographic Questionnaire, the Teaching Anxiety Scale and the Teacher Stress Inventory. Analyses of the data revealed the following main findings: (1) the participants were under great stress, but they were generally not so anxious about teaching, (2) teaching anxiety was generally significantly negatively correlated with age, professional title and years of teaching, while teacher stress was significantly negatively related to professional title, and (3) overall teacher stress, professional title and age were powerful predictors for teaching anxiety, while years of teaching, overall teaching anxiety and its subscales were powerful predictors for teacher stress. Based on these findings, some implications are discussed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 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

Citations29
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Higher EducationSame topicTeacher Professional Development and MotivationFrench-language works237,207