Attitude of Postgraduate Diploma in Teaching (PGDT) Trainees towards the Teaching Profession in Ethiopia
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explored the attitude of trainees in postgraduate diploma in teaching towards the teaching profession. The study had a descriptive survey design. Two hundred and fifty-eight trainees participated in the study. Proportionate stratified random and simple random sampling were used in the selection of the study participants. Quantitative data was collected using a standardized questionnaire developed by Renthlei and Malsawmi (2015). Percentages and Stanine scale frequency distributions were used to analyze the data and report the findings. The study revealed that a lack of other better job opportunities was the main reason for the trainees to choose teaching as their future profession. Most also expressed the interest to quit the training and join any other better job opportunity the moment they get the chance. Overall, the majority had a low attitude towards teaching as a profession. Such a low trainees’ attitude towards teaching and their intention to quit the training or leave the profession any time the opportunity comes their way, puts the government’s plan to expand the coverage of education in jeopardy. Clearly, an increase in schools cannot be achieved without a parallel increase in the number of qualified teachers. Finally, implications of the findings were forwarded to pertinent bodies in teacher education programs.
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 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 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it