MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379259000 · doi:10.36348/jaep.2023.v07i05.002

President Ramon Magsaysay State University Graduate School (PRMSU-GS) Lecturers’ Job Satisfaction in the ‘New Normal’

2023· article· en· W4379259000 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marie Fe D. De Guzman, Roy N. Villalobos

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advances in Education and Philosophy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicHuman Resource and Talent Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJob satisfactionQuarter (Canadian coin)Promotion (chess)ChecklistPsychologyMedical educationGraduate studentsDescriptive statisticsWork (physics)ManagementPedagogyPolitical scienceMedicineSocial psychologyEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A study on job satisfaction study among Graduate School professor/lecturer respondents of President Ramon Magsaysay State University, Iba, Zambales, Philippines was conducted during the first quarter of the school year 2023. A descriptive research design with standardizes survey checklist on job satisfaction. The study used a descriptive statistical tool in analyzing the data gathered. Dimensions of the job satisfaction include pay, promotion, supervision, fringe benefits, contingent rewards, operating conditions, co-workers, nature of work and communication. Majority of the Graduate School professor/lecturer respondents are female, holders of Doctorate degree, Associate Professors and Assistant Professors and working in PRMSU for less than two decades. The Graduate School professor/lecturer respondents strongly agreed that they are satisfied with the aspect of job satisfaction primarily Supervision; followed by nature of work and communication. Overall the Graduate School professor/lecturer respondents perceived strongly agreed they are satisfied with their job/work at the Department during the New Normal.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advances in Education and PhilosophySame topicHuman Resource and Talent ManagementFrench-language works237,207