Opinions of Social Studies Teacher Candidates Prepared for KPSS Regarding the Effect of the Pandemic Period on Their Course Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to reveal the opinions of social studies teacher candidates who are prepared for KPSS on the effects of the pandemic period on their studies. KPSS: It is the shortening of the Public Personnel Selection Exam. These exams determine people to work in public institutions and organizations in Turkey. The phenomenology model, one of the qualitative research techniques, was used in the study. The study group of the research consists of 34 teacher candidates (male = 19, female = 15) graduated from Usak University, Department of Social Studies. In the collection of data in the research, firstly review of literature about the subject was done, and then a semi-structured interview form was used to apply to social studies teacher candidates. Some questions are standardized, some questions are prepared open-ended. In this type of interview, it is possible to obtain in-depth information. The data collected within the scope of the research were transferred to a word file in computer- mediated and subjected to content analysis. At the end of the research, the most frequently applied sources of candidate teachers preparing for KPSS during the pandemic period is that; videos, books, online lessons, articles and lesson notes. The teacher candidates stated that their families’ attitudes towards them were generally positive during the pandemic period. The advantages of the pandemic period was revealed that candidate teachers studied more than usual, the disadvantages of the pandemic periodwas that there was no activity, anxiety and stress increased, and the fear of getting sick came out. In addition, it was emphasized in the study that preparing for KPSS during the pandemic period is more difficult than preparing for it in the normal period.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".