MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4365145260 · doi:10.53378/352983

Spiritual Formation: Challenges and Coping Mechanisms of Senior High Seminarians in the New Normal Education

2023· article· en· W4365145260 on OpenAlexaff
Kent Ian V. Ocbena, John Dave Eballa, Lodecy V. Ocbeña, Maria Aurora G. Victoriano

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review of Social Sciences Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEmployee Performance and Leadership
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNonprobability samplingFocus groupCoping (psychology)PsychologyPrayerCurriculumQualitative researchSpiritual growthSocial mediaMedical educationSociologySocial psychologyPedagogyMedicineClinical psychologyPolitical scienceSocial scienceTheologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The education sector is one of the highly affected by the COVID- 19 pandemic. In the Philippines, various measures have been initiated to implement social isolation strategies, and online teaching is followed with rapid curriculum transformation. This study was conducted at a Seminary School in the Philippines to assess the spiritual formation activities, challenges and coping mechanisms based on the lived experiences of Senior High Seminarians. The study is a qualitative design using descriptive phenomenology as methodology. Data were gathered using a researcher-made interview schedule and questionnaire for the focus group discussion (FGD). Ten senior High School seminarians were chosen through purposive sampling. The result shows that most seminarians attended the Mass and praying novena and holy rosary as part of their spiritual formation activities. However, they spent their time playing online mobile games and are addicted to social media, leading them to lack focus and motivation. Seminarians resort to prayer, self-disciplining through avoidance or limitation in using gadgets and social media, and effective and proper to cope with these challenges. It is recommended that the seminary conduct capacity building on how to combat challenges seminarians face and provide a venue for open discussion and feedback so they may have the chance to voice their sentiments and concerns.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.177
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Review of Social Sciences ResearchSame topicEmployee Performance and LeadershipFrench-language works237,207