Critical Thinking Skills and Self-Efficiency Beliefs in Preservice Physical Education Teachers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this research is to determine the relationship between preservice physical education teachers' self-efficacy beliefs and critical thinking tendencies. For this purpose, our universe constitutes preservice physical education teachers studying at different universities in the 2018-2019 academic year. The research sample consists of 640 preservice teachers in total, 350 males and 290 females. Cities in which the preservice teachers are involved in the research and the universities where they are studying; It consists of 8 provinces: Bartın, Bolu, Çorum, Düzce, Karabük, Kastamonu, Sinop, Zonguldak. Within the scope of the research, “California Critical Thinking Scale (CCTDI)” and “Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale” were used to obtain the data collected from preservice teachers. The data collected for the purpose of the research were analyzed with the SPSS-25 statistical program. Structural equation modeling analyzes were carried out using the data collected from 640 participant groups using the AMOS-25 package program. As a result, students can be directed to earn these trends through activities aimed at gaining critical thinking skills and tendencies by rethinking physical education and sports school programs being implemented in our country. In this regard, university students can be given the opportunity to become highly critical individuals.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".