How Do Kastamonu University Education Faculty Fine Arts Education Department Music Education Department Students Use Their Smartphones?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work; Kastamonu University, Department of Fine Arts Education Faculty of Education was made to students in the Music Department in Turkey. The study is a descriptive field study and it was conducted with a questionnaire model. The study group of this study consists of all students of Kastamonu University Education Faculty Music Education Department. The aim of this study is to get an idea about the use of smart phones by music department students. In the study, a review was made of how music students use their smartphones. The questionnaire method was used to answer questions such as what kind of applications they use on smartphones and how much they benefit from the applications they use professionally. Research questions were asked which applications are the most popular for personal and school use, which applications are satisfied and which applications they are not satisfied with. The data obtained were presented in the form of a table and interpreted. It was concluded that the students used certain programs on their smartphones beneficial for their field education. The study is important because it contributes to researchers, field experts and similar studies.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".