The Mediating Effect of Moral Sensitivity on the Relationship Between Quality Pedagogy and Social Trust of Public Secondary School Teachers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study examined the mediating effect of moral sensitivity on the relationship between quality pedagogy and social trust of public secondary school teachers. The mediating variable (MV) was moral sensitivity, the independent variable (IV) was quality pedagogy, and the dependent variable (DV) was social trust. Primary data were collected using an adapted survey questionnaire administered to 400 teachers in Davao Region, Philippines. The data were analyzed using regression and sobel test. The results revealed that quality pedagogy and moral sensitivity have significant and positive relationship with social trust; likewise, quality pedagogy with moral sensitivity. The findings also showed that moral sensitivity partially mediates the effect of quality pedagogy on social trust, indicating that about only one third of the total effect of quality pedagogy (IV) on the social trust (DV) went through the moral sensitivity (MV) mediation, and about two thirds of the total effect was either direct or mediated by other variables not indicated in the model. Keywords: educational management, moral sensitivity, quality pedagogy, social trust, mediating effect, Philippines.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".