MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3103920077 · doi:10.6000/1929-4409.2020.09.72

The Implicit Contribution of Principal’s Self-Awareness Towards Teacher Self-Efficacy

2020· article· en· W3103920077 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hareesol Khun-Inkeeree, Nor Azah Abdul Aziz, Mohd Faiz Mohd Yaakob, Mat Rahimi Yusof, Mohd Sofian Omar Fauzee

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Criminology and Sociology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Islamic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySelf-efficacyScale (ratio)Leadership styleMedical educationSocial psychologyMedicineGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main focus of this study was to look at the influence of the authentic leadership of the principals and the self-efficacy level of teachers in Pendang district, Kedah. The quantitative survey method using the questionnaire was adopted in this study. The study respondents consisted of 254 teachers randomly selected from 10 national secondary schools in Penang district, Kedah. The benchmark used for authentic leadership is to use the Authentic Leadership Questionnaire (ALQ -Version 1) of the original instrument developed by Avolio, Gardner, and Walumbwa (2007). Similarly, the teacher self-efficacy questionnaire was used in Hoy and Woolfolk's (1993) short form of the Teacher Efficacy Scale developed by Moran, Hoy, and Hoy (1998). The findings show that there is a significant relationship between the dimensions of authentic leadership and the self-efficacy of teachers in Pendang, Kedah. However, there is only one dimension that influences the teacher's self-efficacy, which is the dimension of self-awareness. Based on the findings of this study, it is hoped that it will contribute useful information to help educators in cultivating the principals' leadership style and high levels of teacher self-efficacy to produce symmetrical human capital.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.702
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Criminology and SociologySame topicEducation and Islamic StudiesFrench-language works237,207