The Relationship Between Prospective Teachers' Learning Responsibility and Their Readiness for Teaching Profession
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to investigate the relationship between prospective teachers' level of performing behaviors related to learning responsibility and their level of readiness for teaching profession. The pre-service teachers (n = 408), who are in their second year at the Faculty of Education, filled in the Learning Responsibility Scale and the Readiness Scale for Teaching Profession. The Learning Responsibility Scale consists of 28 Likert-type questions and includes the subscales entitled preparation for learning, active engagement in learning, monitoring learning outcomes and enriching learning. Pearson's correlations and multiple linear regression analyzes were used to analyze the data. The results of the analysis revealed that there was a negative by moderately significant relationship between the prospective teachers’ learning responsibilities and their readiness for teaching profession. In addition, it was found out that the variables of learning responsibility explained 12% of the variation in prospective teachers' scores of readiness for the profession. Active engagement in learning contributed negatively to explain the prospective teachers’ readiness for teaching profession.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".