MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110501256 · doi:10.5539/jel.v9n6p196

The Views of Physical Education and Sports Teaching Instructors on Education in the COVID-19 Period

2020· article· en· W3110501256 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEducation Practices and Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistance educationPhysical educationPsychologyHigher educationMedical educationQualitative researchDutyMathematics educationPedagogySociologyMedicinePolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was conducted to determine the views of academicians regarding “The Views of Physical Education and Sports Teaching Instructors on Education in the Covid-19 Period”. The study used the phenomenological design, which is among qualitative research designs. The study group comprised 63 academicians carrying out duty in 21 different universities in Turkey during the 2019-2020 academic year. In line with the goal, the study was carried out with academicians who could contribute on voluntary basis. In order to determine the views of the academicians, a structured interview form was used. The interview form comprises four questions aiming to determine the necessity of distance education in the physical education area, which courses in the area can be given within the scope of distance education, possibility of teaching applied courses via distance education and problems they face in courses in the distance education process which has been put into effect compulsorily due to pandemic. The interview form was presented to the opinion of two instructors in the educational sciences area who have carried out qualitative research and then expert opinion was received. The application was conducted by primarily reaching the aforementioned academicians via telephone interview between 1 June-27 July 2020 and conveying the questions via e-mail. The descriptive analysis technique was used in analysis of the data. In the study 79% of the academicians stressed that applied courses should not be taught via distance education, while 52% stated that all theoretical courses could be taught via distance education. Examining the views of the academicians on the problems they faced in courses in the distance education process; 55% stated that the problems were associated with the system, 36% efficiency of the course, 30% inadequate student participation in the course, 21% inadequate student feedback, 21% evaluation, 19% inexperience about distance education and 17% lack of internet and computer opportunities in hometowns of students. Considering the findings of the study integratedly; it is believed that teaching applied courses via distance education is inadequate and inefficient. Also it is possible to state that it may not be appropriate to teach theoretical courses via distance education, except when necessary.

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.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score0.374

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.296 · 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