STUDENT VIEWS ON THE POPULARITY/PRESTIGE OF TEACHING (A case of Georgia, Azerbaijan, Iraq, and the USA/Canada) JOBS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
According to existing studies, the popularity of teaching jobs is decreasing. Considering the significance of teaching, without which other professions cannot develop efficiently, it is important to assess how acute the problem is and to try to offer some solutions to it. Another goal of the study was to try to develop recommendations on how to raise teaching jobs’ reputation and thus contribute to the improvement of the situation. The goal of the given study, which is a part of three surveys, was to find out students’ views on the prestige of teaching jobs. The main question was ‘Is teaching prestigious?’ An online survey applying a self-made questionnaire was held in Georgia, Azerbaijan, Iraq, and USA with 657 respondents (122 + 362 + 102 +71, consequently). The conclusion was made that the respondents’ attitude towards teachers in these countries is reasonably positive, however, not many of them are planning to become teachers. It was recommended that to increase the prestige of teaching jobs it is necessary, first of all, to raise the quality of teaching, as well as to stimulate book and movie authors and mass media to present the profession to the public more often and positively
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 | 0.016 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".