A Study on Satisfaction of Teachers Taking Charge of Innovative Education District in Gyeonggi-do: Focusing on the Case of the P Area in Gyeonggi-do
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives This is a research and analysis on the perception of teachers in charge of the introduction and operation of the innovative education district in Gyeonggi-do Province P. The purpose is to redesign the innovative education district project in the P area based on the analysis. Methods A survey was conducted on 108 teachers in charge of the innovative education district in Gyeonggi-do P, and a research method was used on the operation of the innovation education district. Results First, the innovative education district, which started in 6 regions of Gyeonggi-do in 2011, has been extended to 16 provincial offices of education. Also, the innovative education district is set as the future education direction. Second, for teachers, the general matters of the innovative education district, teacher satisfaction, and the satisfaction level was 4.13, 4.22, and 4.02, which was a high average. On the other hand, it appears necessary to redesign the project by gathering feedback from multiple areas, such as teachers, parents, and village activists, since the village school utilizing local resources responded with a "3.80" and the awareness of world culture for multicultural understanding with a "3.85". Third, as a result of the average analysis of the innovative education district survey of teachers in area P, significant results according to their teaching career were clearly revealed. In particular, those with less than 10-15 years of teaching experience generally gave positive and high scores to the questionnaire responses. This seems to be the case since the majority of teachers with between 10 and 15 years of experience are head teachers or young teachers in their 40s, who are engaged in the education industry and possess a deep knowledge of the sector. Conclusions This is the expansion of the innovative education district, and it should be operated as a project with the village community and parents, not as a teacher-centered project. Periodic teacher training is necessary to go together.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".