Social Skills of Students from Educational Sciences: Validity, Reliability, and Percentiles for Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The development of social skills (SS) at various stages of life provides the basis for social and academic success throughout life. This cross-sectional study validates and verifies the reliability of the SS checklist proposed by Goldstein et al 1983. The checklist was administered, which is composed of 6 dimensions and 50 SS questions. 671 students between 18 and 25 years of age, belonging to eight professional programs in the area of Educational Sciences, participated. The results showed that five factors explained 41.4% of the variance of the instrument. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin KMO measure of 0.906 and Bartlett's test of sphericity were highly significant (X2= 11020.251, gl= 1225). The factor loadings of the 6 dimensions and the 50 questions ranged between 0.42 and 0.72. The reliability achieved by Cronbach's alpha was r=0.92. The proposal of percentiles will allow classifying low, moderate and high levels of SS, providing information that can be used not only by students, but also for professionals working in higher education. Consequently, it highlights the importance of developing SS not only at home, but also at school and university, since they need to be stimulated at every stage of life to achieve the proposed objectives.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".